6.27 Update

[Navigata07]

G! has apparently has run a Pareto principle assessment on their Player base and Profits from Revenue.
They apparently concluded that the "old time player" is not one of the 20 percent who brings in 80 percent of the revenue.
Ivan has previously stated (see introduction of items to Bali and WAS flights update thread) that the development would focus on new players and cross-platform integration.
So, G! decided that it was safe to de-emphasize focusing on "old time" players and focus on attracting new less knowledgeable players.
These new Players are willing to spend money to speed time or production.
They have yet to take a bite of the fruit, this forum, which provides knowledge of the game in great detail.
Less knowledgeable players will tend to spend real currency and less likely to rebel when changes are made to the game.

Also, development has concluded that even if "old time players" are part of the 20%, yet they take up 80% of development time, then letting them go will free up time to do more effective and efficient activities.

G! has concluded that new inexperienced players are more profitable.


...........................................................................................................................................................................................
Corporations and Governments will change the rules at any time, whether the masses like it or not. ("Life is not fair.")
The rules of the game and the way the game is played is ever changing and evolving.
They are the few, we are the many, the power lies within us, not them.

I need to read that thread, and I now see why the focus has changed and the limit has been implemented. Theyre basically relying on the "ignorance is bliss" of the majority of players who don't know of the forum. Us being in the know are far more aware of the impact to our playing style, as forum members tend to be the most elite players when it comes to strategy and building their cities quickly due to the constant communication and sharing of knowledge. Even so, I still feel like they should consider the "less than 20%" as they wouldn't have sent Ivan and Ur-quan to be a communication bridge. I do hope they reconsider a better compromise to benefit everyone at least.

 

[Navigata07]

G! has apparently has run a Pareto principle assessment on their Player base and Profits from Revenue.
They apparently concluded that the "old time player" is not one of the 20 percent who brings in 80 percent of the revenue.
Ivan has previously stated (see introduction of items to Bali and WAS flights update thread) that the development would focus on new players and cross-platform integration.
So, G! decided that it was safe to de-emphasize focusing on "old time" players and focus on attracting new less knowledgeable players.
These new Players are willing to spend money to speed time or production.
They have yet to take a bite of the fruit, this forum, which provides knowledge of the game in great detail.
Less knowledgeable players will tend to spend real currency and less likely to rebel when changes are made to the game.

Also, development has concluded that even if "old time players" are part of the 20%, yet they take up 80% of development time, then letting them go will free up time to do more effective and efficient activities.

G! has concluded that new inexperienced players are more profitable.


...........................................................................................................................................................................................
Corporations and Governments will change the rules at any time, whether the masses like it or not. ("Life is not fair.")
The rules of the game and the way the game is played is ever changing and evolving.
They are the few, we are the many, the power lies within us, not them.

Could you please provide a link to that thread? Having some trouble finding it. Thanks.

 

[Navigata07]

.

 

[DarekK]

If G! I want money, let's do limit100 for all players without a subscription.

Anyone who is interested in seriously playing of AC can buy a subscription.

Long-time players have already bought it for the most part but when G! is changing the rules of the bonus VR log-time players will not extend it anymore.
Limit100 will lead all of the players to cancel the subscription.

 

[Free2Play]

I need to read that thread, and I now see why the focus has changed and the limit has been implemented. Theyre basically relying on the "ignorance is bliss" of the majority of players who don't know of the forum. Us being in the know are far more aware of the impact to our playing style, as forum members tend to be the most elite players when it comes to strategy and building their cities quickly due to the constant communication and sharing of knowledge. Even so, I still feel like they should consider the "less than 20%" as they wouldn't have sent Ivan and Ur-quan to be a communication bridge. I do hope they reconsider a better compromise to benefit everyone at least.

Just a quick clarification here while we're at it — nobody has 'sent' me here, I've joined the forum several years ago because I felt an urge to explain how some things work to the most active players who conveniently joined a friendly community here instead of just reading through tens of thousands of player reviews on Google Play and App Store. As I've told several times through the years, I'm not an official representative of the company or its views and should not be regarded as one, athough I try to provide some insight when it's possible why some decisions are made.

By the way, @Ur-quan has kindly agreed to provide previews for the next few updates, so I get to spend a bit more time working on the future updates, especially that big one that reached test version 7.0.99 tonight (it's the max number for our subversions, so we're starting with 7.0.0 again; it only took nine months), while he gets to learn the hard truth about the greedy game developers and their invasive game balance changes from the players.

 

[crescent moon (RIP)]

If G! I want money, let's do limit100 for all players without a subscription.

Anyone who is interested in seriously playing of AC can buy a subscription.

Long-time players have already bought it for the most part but when G! is changing the rules of the bonus VR log-time players will not extend it anymore.
Limit100 will lead all of the players to cancel the subscription.

That wouldn't go over well, considering that Windows players can't buy subscriptions at this time.

 

[crescent moon (RIP)]

Just a quick clarification here while we're at it — nobody has 'sent' me here, I've joined the forum several years ago because I felt an urge to explain how some things work to the most active players who conveniently joined a friendly community here instead of just reading through tens of thousands of player reviews on Google Play and App Store. As I've told several times through the years, I'm not an official representative of the company or its views and should not be regarded as one, athough I try to provide some insight when it's possible why some decisions are made.

By the way, @Ur-quan has kindly agreed to provide previews for the next few updates, so I get to spend a bit more time working on the future updates, especially that big one that reached test version 7.0.99 tonight (it's the max number for our subversions, so we're starting with 7.0.0 again; it only took nine months), while he gets to learn the hard truth about the greedy game developers and their invasive game balance changes from the players.

Ivan, we know you're here because you love us! Why else would you put up with all the "stuff:" we throw at you. And we know it's not the developers who are greedy - you work for a company that gives you the direction to follow.

Fingers crossed that @Ur-quan doesn't give up on us.

We appreciate your sharing with us, and hope it continues.

 

[Navigata07]

Just a quick clarification here while we're at it — nobody has 'sent' me here, I've joined the forum several years ago because I felt an urge to explain how some things work to the most active players who conveniently joined a friendly community here instead of just reading through tens of thousands of player reviews on Google Play and App Store. As I've told several times through the years, I'm not an official representative of the company or its views and should not be regarded as one, athough I try to provide some insight when it's possible why some decisions are made.

By the way, @Ur-quan has kindly agreed to provide previews for the next few updates, so I get to spend a bit more time working on the future updates, especially that big one that reached test version 7.0.99 tonight (it's the max number for our subversions, so we're starting with 7.0.0 again; it only took nine months), while he gets to learn the hard truth about the greedy game developers and their invasive game balance changes from the players.

Thanks for the clarification.
SN: That's A LOT of sub 7.0 updates! Is it one particular thing causing issues, or is it several?

 

[Bigglesbaz]

If G! I want money, let's do limit100 for all players without a subscription.

Anyone who is interested in seriously playing of AC can buy a subscription.

Long-time players have already bought it for the most part but when G! is changing the rules of the bonus VR log-time players will not extend it anymore.
Limit100 will lead all of the players to cancel the subscription.

Dear Mr D, a little knowledge is dangerous I cannot buy a subscription as it's not offered on the windows platform at the moment.

 

[Free2Play]

Thanks for the clarification.
SN: That's A LOT of sub 7.0 updates! Is it one particular thing causing issues, or is it several?

There're several major features that we can't release by themselves because they rely on each other to run, and there're tons of new art assets to support. We're at the stage where the whole thing came together as a puzzle and you can see the forest for the trees, but some of the parts don't fit yet and need to be updated. There're still many known game-breaking bugs to fix, too.

 

[Madge59230]

There're several major features that we can't release by themselves because they rely on each other to run, and there're tons of new art assets to support. We're at the stage where the whole thing came together as a puzzle and you can see the forest for the trees, but some of the parts don't fit yet and need to be updated. There're still many known game-breaking bugs to fix, too.

Ooohhh. Fix the bugs. Take your time. We arent in a rush here! Lol.

 

[andy8758]

This thread has developed into an interesting and challenging debate. And why not? Surely that is what a “forum” is for. For my part I recognise that a good game must be developed to keep profit rolling in for the business selling the product (or game). As players who want to keep playing, having advanced a good way into the game, we have to adapt to changes, and that means adapting our gameplay.

I have often argued that some of the game features/restrictions are highly questionable - and the current imposed warehouse limit is and always has been unacceptable. But the game is still very playable with it. I have had to play with the limit on my game from day one - and that does mean factory waste - but you have to expand/upgrade factories, and accept that overproduction is going to go to waste. Perhaps it is time for the game to develop an eco feature (save our planet guys) that converts waste production to energy/fuel.

But the bottom line remains that we can debate this as much as we like. GI may like and adopt the suggestions, or not. It is their product to sell. We do not have to like it or buy into it any more.

But I like you guys on the forum. I have some great neighbours, belong to a great alliance, and departing game players always saddens me. So stay and give it a try. If you hate the changes we will have to say our goodbyes.

 

[Navigata07]

There're several major features that we can't release by themselves because they rely on each other to run, and there're tons of new art assets to support. We're at the stage where the whole thing came together as a puzzle and you can see the forest for the trees, but some of the parts don't fit yet and need to be updated. There're still many known game-breaking bugs to fix, too.

Oh ok well it seems like you guys have quite a handful in regards to debugging. Thank them for us please and take your time; rather a perfect release months down the road than a rushed one that breaks the game. Appreciate you for keeping us in the loop

 

[Pit1024]

My guess: Probably multiple reasons, but slower progress is at (or near) the top of the list. By hording fuel and other required essentials, you can send out and instantly return numerous flights in a short period (hence: Using the same bonus). If you are limited in the number of flights you can send in a short period, you have to purchase multiple bonuses to achieve the same result.

C'mon, slower progress?!?

It took many months to 3* Jumbo and Giant alliance task flights (5x 1,000 flights). I have still to 3* P Delta and Falcon alliance task destinations, before I move to Thunderbird and Condor. I know what I will be doing more or less next year in the game, if I'm still in.
Even collecting fuel from neighbors it will take me another several months (almost an year) to 3* Giant and P Delta alliance map flights (5x 500 each) with instant return. And after that I should fly again Mesoamerica flights to collect some gold tokens for e.g. Reserve Hangar 2.
I am 3*-ing now Falcon event destinations and next year I'll be 3*-ing Thunderbird event destinations.
And I have even not touched Condor flights with x600 flights to 3* a regular destination...

Even running Mint for more than two years I still need >8,000 greens to completely upgrade my flying item facilities and I don't know how much to expand my airport side more.

I like AC to be long term game. But to know that you will not be able to finish the currently existing tasks in 5 years or so is not long term, it is ridiculous. So I don't see a reason to further slow down the progress.

 

[Navigata07]

C'mon, slower progress?!?

It took many months to 3* Jumbo and Giant alliance task flights (5x 1,000 flights). I have still to 3* P Delta and Falcon alliance task destinations, before I move to Thunderbird and Condor. I know what I will be doing more or less next year in the game, if I'm still in.
Even collecting fuel from neighbors it will take me another several months (almost an year) to 3* Giant and P Delta alliance map flights (5x 500 each) with instant return. And after that I should fly again Mesoamerica flights to collect some gold tokens for e.g. Reserve Hangar 2.
I am 3*-ing now Falcon event destinations and next year I'll be 3*-ing Thunderbird event destinations.
And I have even not touched Condor flights with x600 flights to 3* a regular destination...

Even running Mint for more than two years I still need >8,000 greens to completely upgrade my flying item facilities and I don't know how much to expand my airport side more.

I like AC to be long term game. But to know that you will not be able to finish the currently existing tasks in 5 years or so is not long term, it is ridiculous. So I don't see a reason to further slow down the progress.

I think the issue is that most players arent willing to invest this much into the game. You've clearly done a lot in your game....far more than most of us may ever do. It may be possible that they want to slow down progress for all the major things that everyone want to do, such as map flying and completing collections. I agree that they take long enough already (shoot, even with speeding up map flights, its exhausting and takes time that I tend to not have), but slowing down the game means additional purchases as well. I dont like it, but it certainly could be a reason

 

[andy8758]

Human beings are “hasty” creatures by nature and want to do most things quickly. We live relatively short lives, so playing a game for 5 or 10 years is a major commitment and most people will give up because of that. Airport City has been developed to offer opportunities to “speed up the game” by spending lots of money. But even after spending money, you will still have to dedicate an awful lot of time to complete the game.

I think most of us start playing a game to complete it. But if you enjoy the challenge of playing then completing the game gives you a sense of loss. I remember getting a huge amount of enjoyment from playing the Ultima series of RPG games in the 1990’s and feeling a void at the end (after completing) because I enjoyed being immersed in that world. Replaying the game was never as much fun. But games like Flight Simulators offer unending challenges - they are “career games” where there is always something else to achieve.

I have been playing Airport City for two years. I started off looking for a “holiday game” as an alternative to reading a book on a sunbed. So I spent a lot of money in those two weeks buying coins to progress, before it dawned on me that the game was not like other strategy games - complete your airport then start again (Sim City type of game). This game required spending less money and more time, and I may never be able to dedicate enough time to ever complete the game. Oh, and I stopped buying coins because even a non-forum player (as I was then) quickly realises what a waste of money that is.

Once I had grasped the enormity of the game, I stopped trying to complete it, and instead started setting playing objectives to develop my game, my gameplay and my airport. Then I discovered this Forum and the information here transformed my game and my enjoyment of the game.

I get the impression that long term players use different strategies to me to complete segments of the game. I usually spend between 1 and 2 hours per working day playing so I am time limited on what I can achieve. I do tend to concentrate on a single aircraft and have developed my airport accordingly.

Currently my main focus is Falcons, I constantly fly 6 falcons at the moment and am working on completing all the Falcon destinations and Adventure map destinations without accelerating batches of flights - and it is working quite well. Only 6 stars left of the normal destinations and the first two adventure buildings built. Each week I complete the high volume Alliance mission, then restock my earplugs, then activate Falcon adventure maps over the weekend if I have time, using two Vintage Weathervane bonuses - which gets me an adventure building each month. Sometimes I focus on event flights rather than adventure flights.

So that is what I am playing at the moment, with objectives to gather resources to start Condor flights because they will be the next main focus - Thunderbirds will always be a secondary focus because the pax generated is so low for the cost of resources required to power the flights. I see that others here are aiming to complete the game, and I wish them good luck. For me I enjoy the journey more than I enjoy reaching the destination

 

[Pit1024]

Human beings are “hasty” creatures by nature and want to do most things quickly. We live relatively short lives, so playing a game for 5 or 10 years is a major commitment and most people will give up because of that. Airport City has been developed to offer opportunities to “speed up the game” by spending lots of money. But even after spending money, you will still have to dedicate an awful lot of time to complete the game.

I think most of us start playing a game to complete it. But if you enjoy the challenge of playing then completing the game gives you a sense of loss. I remember getting a huge amount of enjoyment from playing the Ultima series of RPG games in the 1990’s and feeling a void at the end (after completing) because I enjoyed being immersed in that world. Replaying the game was never as much fun. But games like Flight Simulators offer unending challenges - they are “career games” where there is always something else to achieve.

I have been playing Airport City for two years. I started off looking for a “holiday game” as an alternative to reading a book on a sunbed. So I spent a lot of money in those two weeks buying coins to progress, before it dawned on me that the game was not like other strategy games - complete your airport then start again (Sim City type of game). This game required spending less money and more time, and I may never be able to dedicate enough time to ever complete the game. Oh, and I stopped buying coins because even a non-forum player (as I was then) quickly realises what a waste of money that is.

Once I had grasped the enormity of the game, I stopped trying to complete it, and instead started setting playing objectives to develop my game, my gameplay and my airport. Then I discovered this Forum and the information here transformed my game and my enjoyment of the game.

I get the impression that long term players use different strategies to me to complete segments of the game. I usually spend between 1 and 2 hours per working day playing so I am time limited on what I can achieve. I do tend to concentrate on a single aircraft and have developed my airport accordingly.

Currently my main focus is Falcons, I constantly fly 6 falcons at the moment and am working on completing all the Falcon destinations and Adventure map destinations without accelerating batches of flights - and it is working quite well. Only 6 stars left of the normal destinations and the first two adventure buildings built. Each week I complete the high volume Alliance mission, then restock my earplugs, then activate Falcon adventure maps over the weekend if I have time, using two Vintage Weathervane bonuses - which gets me an adventure building each month. Sometimes I focus on event flights rather than adventure flights.

So that is what I am playing at the moment, with objectives to gather resources to start Condor flights because they will be the next main focus - Thunderbirds will always be a secondary focus because the pax generated is so low for the cost of resources required to power the flights. I see that others here are aiming to complete the game, and I wish them good luck. For me I enjoy the journey more than I enjoy reaching the destination

Being consistent you can surely get all stars from regular destinations, with some efforts you could also do all adventure and QL flights. Being consistent you could also do all 10 x 5 x 1,000 special weekly tasks destinations. Surely, if you focus on it, you'll be able to 3* all event flights as well. And this can be done with or without 100-limit imposed.
What could become completely impossible to be done in foreseeable future is to do alliance map flights with 100-limit. 50 destinations, with 1-2 maps weekly (for alliances ranked 21st and lower) or 3-4 maps weekly for rank 2nd to 20th, 3h map duration and only ~ 120-150 flights per map with 100-limit will take ages first to get enough maps and then to do 500 flights per destination.

 

[luxurycat]

Being consistent you can surely get all stars from regular destinations, with some efforts you could also do all adventure and QL flights. Being consistent you could also do all 10 x 5 x 1,000 special weekly tasks destinations. Surely, if you focus on it, you'll be able to 3* all event flights as well. And this can be done with or without 100-limit imposed.
What could become completely impossible to be done in foreseeable future is to do alliance map flights with 100-limit. 50 destinations, with 1-2 maps weekly (for alliances ranked 21st and lower) or 3-4 maps weekly for rank 2nd to 20th, 3h map duration and only ~ 120-150 flights per map with 100-limit will take ages first to get enough maps and then to do 500 flights per destination.

Absolute true! I am now in an Top 100 alliance for 1 1/2 years and if I look to the maps I got...maybe I can start doing this maps in 2 years!!! With a 100 limit - forget it!

 

[Deleted member 9675]

Bunch of whiners. Maybe I should limit my friends/neighbors to all those above level 75, then all those below can fend for themselves ,completing challenges on the side -bar. lol like the meaningless 99 mall visits..............or was that 999?

 

[Wired Parrott]

Since the original inception of the limit, I am certain GI has tracked this and determined
it is not causing a larger margin of player loss when compared with before the limit.
Likely they also think they are making more from these players.

I would argue that the limit is not causing lower level players to spend more. I remember before this forum,
with the 20 gift limit and the trickle of actual gifts I needed. I also remember not having
enough of anything to fly constantly. Meaning the limit would have had no effect on
any purchases I made. I would have loved to have 100 of anything back then.
The limit would start rearing its ugly head just before that game slow down that occurs somewhere
around level 30. Assuming the player has even realized the scope of the game they now see a mass
reduction in progress as well as a limit that wants to further reduce progress. Progress is the balancing
act they must get right and with the moving forward they obviously believe they have that balance correct.
However, being that they tried only 100 as the limit, do they really know if they have the balance correct?

I understand the reasoning behind this but believe that 100 is far to low if considering the sheer
amount of things to accomplish within the game. I would think between 300 - 500 would be the
sweet spot. I actually wonder who came up with 100? We would hope
that it was someone who played the game extensively but alas probably not.