What is the ideal ratio of major attractions to filler attractions?

[Matt N]

Hi guys. In recent years, I’ve seen a number of complaints talking about how the UK Merlin parks, particularly Alton Towers, are too focused on the major attractions and not focused enough on the filler attractions. In Alton Towers’ case, this complaint manifests itself in the form of a complaint that the park is too coaster-heavy. So I’d be intrigued to know; in your opinion, what is the ideal ratio of major attractions to filler attractions at a theme park? At what point does a park go from being too major-heavy or too filler-heavy to feeling balanced, in your opinion?

I only ask because I’ll admit I’d be interested to hear some thoughts on this matter given how people seem to feel about the UK Merlin parks at present.

I’m not really sure on how I feel about this, personally, but what do you think?

 

[SkyrushSimp]

It really depends on the park. I think that Disney and Universal both do a great job in both, Disney in Particular because they theme an area around a major ride or two and add the filler to complement that ride. (Think of all the Toy Story rides next to Slinky Dog Dash). I think for amusement parks like Six Flags and Cedar fair, the flats (and good ones) are important, especially when you're spending a whole day there.

I think SeaWorld is a big offender for being too top heavy. SeaWorld Orlando was really bad with this problem 2-3 years after Mako was installed. Ice Breaker is helping, but I think either another decent coaster (maybe that rumored surf coaster?) or a quality flat ride would make it much better. SW San Antonio is also a little top heavy, but since the park still is growing rapidly I'll cut it some slack.

 

[Indy]

It really depends on the nature of the park and the number of coasters. Really, the more coasters a park has, the less I care about fillers. At a park like Energylandia or Six Flags Magic Mountain, I don't really care about fillers because I have so many coasters that I can ride. But a park like Knoebel's or Kennywood needs the fillers to be a good park. Those fillers are the difference between me doing a cred run versus actually sticking around for quite a while.

 

[Sandman]

In Alton Towers’ case, this complaint manifests itself in the form of a complaint that the park is too coaster-heavy. So I’d be intrigued to know; in your opinion, what is the ideal ratio of major attractions to filler attractions at a theme park? At what point does a park go from being too major-heavy or too filler-heavy to feeling balanced, in your opinion?

I only ask because I’ll admit I’d be interested to hear some thoughts on this matter given how people seem to feel about the UK Merlin parks at present.

In the case of AT, all you've got to do is compare it to Thorpe.

Although Thorpe has 3 less coasters than Towers, they still have 7.
Still got almost equal the amount of thrill coasters.
Still got taller and faster coasters.
But they've also got an actual flat ride line-up and a major water ride.

Haven't really answered your question.

To clarify, I don't think there is a ratio that unanimously works the same for every park. Mainly it comes down to the park size and attendance figures.

Using Towers as the example here, it's a huge park both literally and figuratively. The most popular park in the UK and one of the most significant in Europe.

And with that kind of reputation comes an expectation. The issue is that there's a lot of dead points throughout the park; areas that quite clearly used to house flat rides that no longer exist.

When you're located in the middle of nowhere with a meagre 6 hour park day and a busy crowd that have probably driven hours to spend £40.00 for a day out queuing for the same 10 rides, you absolutely need a robust line-up of filler attractions to take the sting out of the frustration and add value to the experience.

On the other hand, lots of smaller parks tend to function perfectly well with a large selection of sub-par filler rides and a much smaller number of coasters.

 

[rob666]

The perfect ratio is 1:1:1
Rollercoaster, beer, dodgems.
Then repeat.

 

[Furiustobaco]

I think it depends on the park, there is two parks that really spring to mind here.

Phantasialand for me springs to mind, it only really has three big coasters, but it has a host of amazing support like Chiapas, Colorado, Talocan, Mystery Castle- its a park that is practically made on its support attractions, its support attractions are so good you forget they are even support.

Europa Park is another one- You have 4-5 major coasters, every other coaster is filler, and the park lineup is made up of like a dozen or more dark rides, tons of water rides, and shows. Some of that filler is really fun tho, they seem to have more dark rides than sense lol.

I do think Alton Towers is by far the worst offender for being top heavy- it needs support rides, and it needs them now. The retro squad seemed to ease the pain a little, but a permanent solution would be better..
Cedar Point i felt in ways had a slight problem, it does have flat rides though, i think it just has so many coasters that anything else is basically a waste of time.

 

[WC90]

For a park owner is 0. What is better than make money only with rides at the level of a municipal park? The number of big attractions depends on the public that a park wants to build. I noticed that mediocre parks have the tendency to indoctrinate families to believe that big attractions are not for them. Why should parks invest millions for a good coaster if a family is happy with two shows and a carousel? Obviously even an idiot would understand what the downsides are.

For me it really depends on how many coasters and what i mean for a filler attraction. With the quality standards of Phantasialand even rides which usually are considered filler become major attractions.

 

[chainedbanana]

Phantasialand for me springs to mind, it only really has three big coasters, but it has a host of amazing support like Chiapas, Colorado, Talocan, Mystery Castle- its a park that is practically made on its support attractions, its support attractions are so good you forget they are even support.

I'd argue that all those rides are still 'main attractions' - because 'main attraction' doesn't mean it has to be a coaster! Therefore Phantasialand is 'Main ride' heavy ....which is why its one of the best theme parks in the world...