Decoding 2020

[silver2005]

So going by your guys' logic, how did Diamondback and Banshee get to be bigger than Magnum and Raptor?

[KevM86]

Even with an epic giga, Kings Island is not even close to being in a position to over take CP. Not to me anyway. KI is a 45 min drive for me while CP is roughly a 4 hour drive. I still go to Cedar Point multiple times a year whilst only visiting KI about every other year. A great giga would only increase my visits to KI not decrease my visits to CP

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[KevM86]

So going by your guys' logic, how did Diamondback and Banshee get to be bigger than Magnum and Raptor?

To be fair, I would take Magnum over DB any day of the week. ( Double post sorry )

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[KI_FAN_4_LIFE]

3 hours ago, ethancoaster said:

Wow, this thread has gone wildly off topic. The quality of KIC seems to have dropped drastically since the last time I was active on here (3 years ago). What happened? 

I bet you are a ton of fun at parties 

[Benjamin22]

Just now, KevM86 said:

To be fair, I would take Magnum over DB any day of the week. ( Double post sorry )

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

I mean most people prefer Diamondback over magnum.. the point of his post is that CedarFair isn’t going to go out of their way to build mediocre coasters to protect Carowinds & Cedar Point because as you mentioned they don’t protected. If a park 4 hours away getting a giga coaster really threatened Cedar Points title of “Coaster capital of the world” then Kings Island wouldn’t be getting a giga in the first place.

[KevM86]

I mean most people prefer Diamondback over magnum.. the point of his post is that CedarFair isn’t going to go out of their way to build mediocre coasters to protect Carowinds & Cedar Point because as you mentioned they don’t protected. If a park 4 hours away getting a giga coaster really threatened Cedar Points title of “Coaster capital of the world” then Kings Island wouldn’t be getting a giga in the first place.

Yes I agree. It doesn't make business sense to have 2 parks and say let's make one of them awesome and the other mediocre to make the other seem that much better. Makes more sense to me to just have 2 awesome parks.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[FirefighterENG44]

10 minutes ago, KevM86 said:

To be fair, I would take Magnum over DB any day of the week. ( Double post sorry )

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

To each his own but magnum is showing its age and beats me to death.  Still a good ride though 

[KevM86]

To each his own but magnum is showing its age and beats me to death.  Still a good ride though 

It is getting a bit rough. I just mean I think it is a better ride imo. You get a ton of ejector air especially at the end you just don't have on DB at all. DB has some decent air time but you never really get that feeling that your going to fly out of your seat.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[FirefighterENG44]

1 minute ago, KevM86 said:

It is getting a bit rough. I just mean I think it is a better ride imo. You get a ton of ejector air especially at the end you just don't have on DB at all. DB has some decent air time but you never really get that feeling that your going to fly out of your seat.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

This is true.   Been awhile since I’ve been up to CP.  The older rides just beat me up bc I can barely fit in them so I tend to enjoy the newer rides they accommodate someone 6’2” 215 lbs haha.  Even worse when I sit next to my brother whose even taller 

[spooky21]

1 hour ago, silver2005 said:

So going by your guys' logic, how did Diamondback and Banshee get to be bigger than Magnum and Raptor?

Exactly what I said.

[presto123]

1 hour ago, KI_FAN_4_LIFE said:

I bet you are a ton of fun at parties 

Thread Police are more annoying than the people they are calling out. Everybody is excited about this coaster. Comments veering slightly off center make this thread interesting. Especially since there is only so much to work with as far as "decoding" right now. If it's even slightly relevant, I want to hear it. Love the comedy posts in this thread as well. Many of us can use it:)

[MaestroJr]

I don’t know if this has previously been stated, but I noticed yesterday from the Eiffel Tower that the Firehawk trains and top of the loop is still remaining. Does anyone have an idea on why they are just laying there.

[thatguyfromohio]

I don’t know if this has previously been stated, but I noticed yesterday from the Eiffel Tower that the Firehawk trains and top of the loop is still remaining. Does anyone have an idea on why they are just laying there.

I think the loop will be a new arch sign to replace the old xbase one, that would look nice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[thatguyfromohio]

Currently at the park, hopefully can see little details that could been done during the week


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[silver2005]

On the Firehawk trains-I'm guessing that SFA and Carowinds (I don't think they're compatible with Nighthawk anyhow) both plan on scrapping their Vekoma Flying Dutchman coaster and thus don't need KI's set.  

[KIghostguy]

56 minutes ago, MaestroJr said:

I don’t know if this has previously been stated, but I noticed yesterday from the Eiffel Tower that the Firehawk trains and top of the loop is still remaining. Does anyone have an idea on why they are just laying there.

I don't know about the loop, but the trains are not the same design as Nighthawk. Kings Island did send over other parts to Carowinds, though.

[thatguyfromohio]

No real changes, just more annoying preteen boys around the park than usual. , physically looking, the clearing is very tiny, especially comparing it to Diamondback lift hill, looks like Diamondbacks hill would take up 1/3 of the land clearing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[presto123]

Probably been covered before, but why such a big hurry to get land cleared when footings are probably not going to be started for at least 3 or 4 more months? Does anybody think they will start long before announcement date?

[sixohdieselrage]

@thatguyfromohioIf you saw it from the air, you would change your mind. The clearing takes up roughly the same space as from the front gate, to the Jukebox Diner. 

[kirbias1]

5 hours ago, silver2005 said:

So going by your guys' logic, how did Diamondback and Banshee get to be bigger than Magnum and Raptor?

Banshee and DB weren't major record breakers in their respective coaster categories, unless you want count to an inverted roller coaster length record that most people do not care about. Why do you think they didn't spend the extra money to go highest and fastest with Banshee? It probably would not have cost significantly more.  Well, because they didn't want to break Wicked Twister's height and speed record for inverted coasters AND they didn't want to go higher than GateKeeper, which is similar ride due to similar restraints, etc. that opened a year earlier. Yes, Banshee is only 3 feet less in height than GateKeeper, but to me this minimal height differential is more obvious in how it is intentional than not. Why? Because it shows how CF kept these coasters at a minimum height apart to minimize cost and to maximize marketability to boast superior height and speed, albeit by only small amounts. I guess some people will agree and some won't, but nevertheless, what I'm stating here are statistics that are factual. It's not too difficult to sell this if you look at the numbers because it pretty much sells itself.

[SonofBaconator]

Question that anyone could answer. What if the attraction was closer to 300ft in heighth and 5,000ft in length as opposed to say Fury 325 or Millennium Force; would you guys feel robbed? Or would you guys rather be grateful for what we get? I've been hearing mixed reviews on reddit, YouTube, and other sites that are talking about the leaked blueprints and wanted to know your guy's honest opinions.

[jcovelli]

27 minutes ago, presto123 said:

Probably been covered before, but why such a big hurry to get land cleared when footings are probably not going to be started for at least 3 or 4 more months? Does anybody think they will start long before announcement date?

Maybe they're not in a hurry, maybe the company that was contracted to clear land only had that time slot available. Or, maybe footers will go in this week.. we don't know. I would think they would announce before footers because once that starts, most people can figure out what type of coaster it is, layout, etc. 

[KIghostguy]

11 minutes ago, SonofBaconator said:

Question that anyone could answer. What if the attraction was closer to 300ft in heighth and 5,000ft in length as opposed to say Fury 325 or Millennium Force; would you guys feel robbed? Or would you guya rather be grateful for what we get? I've been hearing mixed reviews on reddit, YouTube, and other sites that are talking about the leaked blueprints and wanted to know your guy's honest opinions.

I am fine if itsn't taller than Fury. I would be pretty upset if it isn't longer than Diamondback.

[kirbias1]

38 minutes ago, presto123 said:

Probably been covered before, but why such a big hurry to get land cleared when footings are probably not going to be started for at least 3 or 4 more months? Does anybody think they will start long before announcement date?

I think they'll start in June or early July.

[RuthlessAirtime]

4 hours ago, SonofBaconator said:

Question that anyone could answer. What if the attraction was closer to 300ft in heighth and 5,000ft in length as opposed to say Fury 325 or Millennium Force; would you guys feel robbed? Or would you guya rather be grateful for what we get? I've been hearing mixed reviews on reddit, YouTube, and other sites that are talking about the leaked blueprints and wanted to know your guy's honest opinions.

I would be happy to get a giga, but overall I would feel robbed.

These are my reasons:

1. Getting a giga is a one time opportunity for a park - once you build a giga it is extremely unlikely you’ll ever get something taller or faster. Only a couple parks have ever had that happen. If you’re going to build a giga at all, either go all out and build something that blows everyone’s socks off, or build something else entirely if you’re not willing to go the extra mile.
2. King’s Island is in a unique position with the amount of land and topography they have to do something incredible with a giga. It would be a shame if they wasted that opportunity to build something “meh” in the interest of the minutiae of shareholder interests/Cedar Fair financial reasons posited by the suits upstairs etc.
3. As far as KI is concerned, consumer opinion for the last 10 years or so has been that “once KI gets a giga, it will be an experience that is a step above the rest.” It would be a laughably tone-deaf move by Cedar Fair to ignore this expectation in the interest of VERY TINY financial details.
4. Many of the Gigas that have been built have one upped the one before it in some way or another - it would be really sad if this was the first backtrack in the lineup of gigas built so far. It would be a sad indicator of King’s Island being more interested in building something “just decent” instead of being interested in providing extremely unique/groundbreaking ride experiences. For that reason, I absolutely want some kind of record broken and I don’t feel selfish or entitled for wanting that for the reasons listed above.

 

[silver2005]

4 minutes ago, kirbias1 said:

Banshee and DB weren't major record breakers in their respective coaster categories, unless you want count an inverted roller coaster length record that most people do not care about. Why do you think they didn't spend the extra money go highest and fastest with Banshee? It probably would not have cost significantly more.  Well, because they didn't want to break Wicked Twister's height and speed record for inverted coasters AND they didn't want to go higher than GateKeeper, which is similar ride due to similar restraints, etc. that opened a year earlier. Yes, Banshee is only 3 feet less in height than GateKeeper, but to me this minimal height differential is more obvious in how it is intentional than not. Why? Because it shows how CF kept these coasters at a minimum height distance apart to minimize cost all while to boast records to maximize marketability to boast superior height, and speed, albeit by only small amounts. I guess some people will agree and some won't, but nevertheless, what I'm stating here are statics that are factual. It's not too difficult to sell this if you look at the numbers because it pretty much sells itself.

This response pretty much sums my point in asking that question.  That logic is highly, highly flawed and unsubstantiated.  CP is its own park and KI is its own park.  Sure, CF will probably do bits to let the two differentiate themselves, but there's enough unique going on at both parks that keeps them unique.  This entire focus on how the stats will somehow make or break a coaster addition is nonsense and there is literally no evidence ever to back up that line of thought.  I think this line of thought stems from enthusiasts not getting what they want and somehow making arguments to shift the burden that the parks' and parent company are somehow making these backroom decisions on how parks should flex a few stats here and there to make other parks seem more appealing.  This line of thought is enthusiast entitlement through and through.  We had this exact conversation about Banshee and whether or not it'd be bigger than Raptor unironically, which, the stats alone proved that notion false.  Banshee and GateKeeper are entirely different types and were built for entirely different reasons.  When they built GateKeeper, CP already had about every other type that'd you'd consider a staple already built.  KI building Banshee was to plug up a lack of a staple being that most parks of KI's size had an inverted coaster in the line up, which can also be said about Diamondback.  Now, the reason we didn't have those types was due to CP, but because they were in different chains, and once CF acquired KI, they rounded up the coaster lineup nicely, to fit what CF's park model is.  Last time I checked, KI still draws in its fare share of out of market guests.  This argument only works if KI was somehow not doing so and is somehow doing bad in business as a result of Banshee and Diamondback being a few hairs short on stats, which there is 0 correlation (additionally, the kind of business KI had the year they built Mystic Timbers also obliterates that argument).  CF did have some slower growth last year and whatever becomes of this giga is a result of that, but CF obviously still sees KI successful enough to green light a giga, a type which only 5 other parks in the entire world have at this point.  

The whole argument of being disappointed by a giga coaster has to be one of the stupidest things that the enthusiast community has produced. 

[sixohdieselrage]

We could have ended up like that empty property up north....

[Sorner]

Saw this interesting interaction on Twitter tonight. Seems a little, specific. 

[kirbias1]

19 minutes ago, silver2005 said:

This response pretty much sums my point in asking that question.  That logic is highly, highly flawed and unsubstantiated.  CP is its own park and KI is its own park.  Sure, CF will probably do bits to let the two differentiate themselves, but there's enough unique going on at both parks that keeps them unique.  This entire focus on how the stats will somehow make or break a coaster addition is nonsense and there is literally no evidence ever to back up that line of thought.  I think this line of thought stems from enthusiasts not getting what they want and somehow making arguments to shift the burden that the parks' and parent company are somehow making these backroom decisions on how parks should flex a few stats here and there to make other parks seem more appealing.  This line of thought is enthusiast entitlement through and through.  We had this exact conversation about Banshee and whether or not it'd be bigger than Raptor unironically, which, the stats alone proved that notion false.  Banshee and GateKeeper are entirely different types and were built for entirely different reasons.  When they built GateKeeper, CP already had about every other type that'd you'd consider a staple already built.  KI building Banshee was to plug up a lack of a staple being that most parks of KI's size had an inverted coaster in the line up, which can also be said about Diamondback.  Now, the reason we didn't have those types was due to CP, but because they were in different chains, and once CF acquired KI, they rounded up the coaster lineup nicely, to fit what CF's park model is.  Last time I checked, KI still draws in its fare share of out of market guests.  This argument only works if KI was somehow not doing so and is somehow doing bad in business as a result of Banshee and Diamondback being a few hairs short on stats, which there is 0 correlation (additionally, the kind of business KI had the year they built Mystic Timbers also obliterates that argument).  CF did have some slower growth last year and whatever becomes of this giga is a result of that, but CF obviously still sees KI successful enough to green light a giga, a type which only 5 other parks in the entire world have at this point.  

The whole argument of being disappointed by a giga coaster has to be one of the stupidest things that the enthusiast community has produced. 

"stupidest things that the enthusiast community ever produced" ? Wow! It seems like you are getting very emotional about this. I am stating my opinion from actual stats of rides. I see nothing to back your argument that deals with facts. Also, I think you're still missing the point. I'm not upset we are possibly getting a giga, i' m upset with the possibility that KI is going to get something that could've been done better, especially with all of the land it has to work with. Please keep in mind that everyone on here is entitled to their opinion and just because you don't agree with it, doesn't give you the right to let your emotions get the best of you by being rude. Just remember we are all KI fans here.

[silver2005]

^When have the stats (and only the stats) of a single coaster been detriment to the park that built it?