[REWORK] NM, OR (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

Shiva
Posts: 2419
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: NM, OR, WA (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

#11 Post by Shiva » 18 Apr 2019 23:04

New Mexico possible addition:
South of I-10:
Consisting mostly of NM 9, hugging the Mexico border.
East end being NM 28, between NM 9 and I-10 exit 139.
West end at Animas Street. Why that? Due to Lordsburg being ingame and no space for Roadforks NM 80 intersection. Nor NM 338.
Well, This is the west end, if not counting on Arizona.
Otherwise NM 9 would go west until it meets NM 80, southbound, towards the Arizona border and Douglas / San Simon.
Why have I included NM 11? There is no space for it.
Unless removing Petro and Exxon. And replacing those two with Deming and 5R Travel Center.
Exxon and Petro do look nice tho!

Between I-10 and I-40:
This would open up US-180, north.
From Deming and northto Gallup. US-180, NM 12, NM 32, Quemado "I think it is depicted ingame, at US-60?", NM 36 and finally NM 602
And from there, US-491 goes to Shiprock. And meets US-64.

AZ and NM layout.

/edit:
Actually... NM 90, could be viable, from Lordsburg to US-180.

And to my surprise...
NM 81, south of Hachita too. What there? Farming!
What do you see in that Google Streetview? Yes, a semi truck. Where is it going? A farm with farming equipment.

Why have I come with these southwest New Mexico suggestions?
Partly to show that smaller roads could be added too.
And if someday ATS has alternative base map options, instead of "only" having California/Nevada/Arizona.
This way, the yet unnamed Lordsburg would not be a dead end to nowhere, where trucks have to turn back on I-10.
NTM's B-Double Telescopic Skeletal Container Carrier. Youtube video on how it works. W & S thread.
B-Double trailer and short modes: EN 7.82 swap body, 20’ or 30’ containers.
Standalone 40' mode: EN 7.82 swap body, 20', 30', 40' or 2 x 20' trailer.

djttcancer87
Posts: 5
Joined: 22 Apr 2019 04:57

Re: NM, OR, WA (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

#12 Post by djttcancer87 » 22 Apr 2019 23:26

In New Mexico, the section of US Highway 62 from Carlsbad to Hobbs is also US Highway 180, as that road is considered "62-180". I-10 is also Hwy 180 from Deming through Las Cruces and on to El Paso. Also, Interstate 25 through all of NM is also US Highway 85.

I can see how US Highway 285 was cut out due to scale to preserve the Sandia Mtn pass on I-40 and I-25 near east of Santa Fe. But with this, the map doesn't feel complete. Highway 285 serves as a corridor from Vaughn-Encino to Santa Fe. It crosses Interstate 40 at Clines Corners, which is a nice truckstop. 285 then goes to I-25, going to Santa Fe. It doesn't feel right having to use 54 and 84 as a detour.

Lovington, NM should probably be fixed and added, since US-82 does not go through Hobbs at all. NM Hwy 18 is a 5 lane road and it is accurate with the road style, but it's not a long curve. The road should be straight/linear out of Hobbs, and a turn could be added at Lovington to go west on 82. I do like how the wind turbines and the plains are, and it feels like Texas however.

In Hobbs, the west side where Hwy 62-180 leaves town isn't that green. Instead it's alot of caliche and oil companies, and the intersection of NM-529 is on the plains, a bit further out.
In Carlsbad, the WIPP Relief Route (the truck route named after the nuclear storage plant) ends at a traffic light in-game. Instead, there isn't actually a traffic signal and it connects with 285 (which SCS probably already knew). But due to scale, I'd say the intersection could just be a stop sign.
In Roswell, the intersection of the truck route and US-380/70 is actually a 4-way stop (even though it's 4-lane roads). And it may have changed, but that's how it's been.

And so far New Mexico is still my favorite state and SCS put great detail into it.

alclark
Posts: 104
Joined: 27 Dec 2018 22:58

Re: NM, OR, WA (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

#13 Post by alclark » 26 Apr 2019 03:22

On the western end of the US 70-380 concurrence, this intersection near the Billy the Kid exhibit could use a revamp. The real-world intersection has a much wider median, acceleration/deceleration lanes and slip roads for turning traffic, as well as being located at a curve in the highway. If US 70 is ever extended towards US 54 and Alamogordo then I would definitely like to see this intersection revamped since in its current state it feels like playing a game of Frogger trying to dodge traffic while making a left turn to go east.

Unknown#
Posts: 562
Joined: 10 Feb 2018 15:39

Re: NM, OR, WA (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

#14 Post by Unknown# » 26 Apr 2019 11:10

@alclark - YES, I forgot about that. I hated going through that intersection, especially when approaching from the north.

Unknown#
Posts: 562
Joined: 10 Feb 2018 15:39

Re: NM, OR, WA (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

#15 Post by Unknown# » 13 May 2019 22:44

Although it isn't that much of a change, it'll still be a nice addition to have. Recently, Sky City IRL got 3 new roundabouts, 2 of which are in the junction with I-40 and that last one going south which'll lead you to the rest area just south of the Sky City Casino.

Image

User avatar
supersobes
Global moderator
Posts: 12351
Joined: 07 Dec 2016 21:53
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Contact:

Re: NM, OR, WA (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

#16 Post by supersobes » 13 May 2019 23:06

I would like to see highway interchanges with roundabouts too. But first, I think that SCS should create the tools to properly make roundabouts. As said by natvander here, the current technical system does not allow US roundabouts to be designed as they are in real-life.

User avatar
Sora
Posts: 1717
Joined: 22 Feb 2017 18:47

Re: NM, OR, WA (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

#17 Post by Sora » 14 May 2019 01:12

Speaking of roundabout interchanges reminds me of the fact that such an interchange is basically the one meaningful feature Ehrenberg AZ has... and it's not in the game.

Then again, perhaps the problem there is Ehrenberg itself being marked over literally either of the cities surrounding it on I-10 (i.e. Blythe CA and Quartzsite AZ). Ah, but that's a matter for the other thread and not this one.

User avatar
supersobes
Global moderator
Posts: 12351
Joined: 07 Dec 2016 21:53
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Contact:

Re: NM, OR, WA (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

#18 Post by supersobes » 14 May 2019 01:19

I think SCS added the Ehrenberg as a marked city over the other two because it is right on the border. SCS seems to like cities that are right on the borders of states, presumably so they can extend the the highway network across the entire length of the state. The five point roundabout in Ehrenberg is a pretty unique design. It would definitely be a welcome addition to ATS. However, its unique design could also be a downfall is it may prove to be very difficult for SCS to create. We already know that their map tools are yet optimized to properly create North American roundabouts. Although that said, this roundabout is pretty similar to some of the roundabouts in the France DLC for ETS2.

Unknown#
Posts: 562
Joined: 10 Feb 2018 15:39

Re: NM, OR, WA (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

#19 Post by Unknown# » 14 May 2019 01:30

@supersobes - I actually thought about having that roundabout as a suggested feature before rbsanford's Base Game Map PR & RS topic was created, but I never got around to it.

It'd definitely be a warm welcome to ATS if Ehrenberg would get reworked (such as getting rid of that Charged store as there isn't a Best Buy (which Charged is based on) in Ehrenberg IRL).



Also, I didn't say for these changes to come immediately. I'm just saying these are changes that would be great whenever SCS can get to them.

NorthernAirTrucker
Posts: 31
Joined: 15 Jun 2019 05:54

Re: NM, OR, WA (and future DLCs) public research and rework suggestions

#20 Post by NorthernAirTrucker » 15 Jun 2019 06:28

Well now that Washington is out we can begin to consider it in rework suggestions. I’ll start by saying WA is so good that it hardly needs anything that I can think of though I have a bit of a decency bias as WA is the only state currently featured in the game that I have been in in the last 5 years as I’ve been visiting east more as of late. The one thing that really needs done and probably will get done is extension of WA-155 from Grand Coulee to Omak because as it is I find Grand Coulee can get a bit inaccessible, but again this is a straightforward addition as both ends of it already exist. I was a little disappointed to see that SeaTac or another airport wasn’t featured in WA as all the other DLC maps have featured the airport of the largest metro area, but having a look at the nonexistent space where it would go due to scaling get I see why it was skipped. The other thing I noticed was skipped was the area just north of Lake Samish with the interesting curves and hills which to me is probably the most scenic portion between Bellingham and the Seattle area nature wise, but again the scaling is just a bit too small for that I guess.

Post Reply

Return to “American Truck Simulator”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest