Poll: Choose (3) States you would like to see next

What state should be next

Kentucky
11
2%
Mississippi
30
6%
Iowa
102
20%
Tennessee
25
5%
South Dakota
98
19%
Louisiana
127
24%
North Dakota
46
9%
Illinois
84
16%
 
Total votes: 523

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30158
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next

#5101 Post by flight50 » 31 Mar 2021 13:55

Nebraska and Kansas maybe mostly flat but that are among the top tier of states with the most lanes miles of roads. These states could be densely populated with rural development. Combining these two states is too much for one map team. Either solo releases or use a super team.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30158
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next

#5102 Post by flight50 » 02 May 2021 22:43

I was just thinking about the polls earlier today and decided to post some thoughts. Although its way to earlier to know what is going to happen with Texas, I'd rather not get my hopes up to see Texas for 2021. It was said that Colorado might not make it out for Winter 2020 but it did. Well Colorado is a much smaller state. You could say that Texas is about 3 times the size of Colorado. More cities and a much larger road network. Although Texas was started early 2019, we just got the official blog for Texas 2 years later based on what Pavel stated after Washington released in 2019. Texas will be a lonnnng developing project at 2.5-3+ years perhaps. I really see it getting pushed along just like Iberia. So Spring 2022 is a better guess. If it comes Winter 2021...great but I'm really anticipating not getting a map for this Winter for either game. That possibility can be reality based on the sizes of the maps coming for both games.

So with that said, I still think ATS can still get 2 other maps out next year. So 3 total maps....yes... its possible. I've mentioned it before in other threads but the info really goes here I suppose with the poll. Texas may not have much effect on getting 2 other maps for 2022 imo. Why....the Xmas stream mentioned dlc would normally go in the following Winter slot. If Texas wasn't such as huge state, it would come for Winter more than likely. But the extra time to get it ready may require an addition 3-4 months. If Pavel put 20 mappers or so on Texas like he wanted to (based on his words from a past stream), then once Texas releases, there are 20 mappers available to move on. Considering the states get much smaller than Texas, I think the Texas team can split into two. One goes to Oklahoma and one goes to Louisiana...or Kansas. One of the teams should be able to kick out a state for the end of the year. The other goes to Spring of the following year. Louisiana would favored over Kansas considering no fighting over sectors with Oklahoma. Although SCS has proven they can work with sector issues, its just easier to avoid the conflicts when possible. So 2023 could be Louisiana, Kansas and Arkansas perhaps. But until SCS technically announces 3 map teams, I'll keep the polls as just 2 states.

With Wyoming set to release within the next 2 months (speculation), that team should be able to go on to Montana. If Montana is not announced as the next state on the 2021 Xmas stream, I'll be baffled. Idaho will be left hanging for yet another year and that will anger a lotttt of people. There is a 95% chance in my book that Montana follows Texas.....it just has too. If the Wyoming team goes there, Montana could release for late Summer 2022 though. If Texas releases for Spring, ATS can now spread out for 3 maps a year once the ginormous Texas releases. Releases could shift to Spring, mid to late Summer and then Winter still. With smaller states after Texas and Montana release (if SCS doesn't bundle), this could be the approach per year. So if we split up the 12 months into 3 phases, now we get:
Jan/Feb/March/April - this brings a map for April/May
May/June/July/Aug - this brings a map for Aug/Sep
Sept/Oct/Nov/Dec - this brings a map for Nov/Dec

This puts distance at 3-4 months per dlc vs 6 months. Not too bad.

I'm not sure where ETS2 maps will fall into place but they will fit in a slot as well. To date, they still produce one huge map and no multiple maps yet. If ETS2 goes with multiple maps a year, the dlcs must reduce in size closer to ATS maps. Of course this post is just me speculating as there is no validation to any of this. But one thing we do know is that ATS now has 4 map team. Although they are not official, we do have (4) map leads now. Pretty much 3 full size teams and a 4th (rebuild team) that is still growing. But for the purpose of my guesses, I am only speaking on the behalf of the 3 map teams that are working on paid dlc's. (2) on Texas right now and (1) on Wyoming. All though Montana is the 3rd largest state in the lower 48, its no Texas nor California. So the team doing Wyoming, could more than likely pull off Montana. Maybe 1-2 extra people are needed, maybe not. But Texas could spare 1-2 come next Spring if need be to help polish up Montana. Wyoming could have just about the same amount of mountain areas as Montana. Montana is just a bit more East to West than Wyoming. 2/3 of Montana is flatter lands and very small sparse cities. So no a lot of energy will have to go into all of Montana. East of I-15 in Montana will be easy mapping for sure. The road network itself isn't too bad. Its wide open lands and should be fun to navigate. They don't call it Big Sky Country for nothing. With huge fields of grasslands, detailing this area outs will be very similar to what we have in Eastern Colorado and more than likely many parts of Wyoming. The experience from Wyoming will basically be an extension into Montana so its makes perfect sense for the Wyoming team to move there.

Based on the polls, most of us would love to see Montana finally get the nod. Followed by Oklahoma for sure. Oklahoma supports a lot despite its size. Obviously it adds to what Texas starts. We get a a nice chuck of I-40 and I-35. Not only that, but I-44 becomes valid now. The panhandle area of Oklahoma adds to the livestock region for Texas, Colorado and Kansas for when it comes. Oklahoma sets up Kansas perfectly at that point and the connections of I-70 and I-35 will be a welcomed connection. If my predictions for 2023 are solid, that is when Kansas will be here as Montana and Oklahoma should definitely be in place by then. East of I-35 is pretty green. Its flatter land greens for the most part as the PNW is more elevated greens. So for those who want flatter lands and still be green, East of I-35 will give you a huge chunk of land to have that. The I-35 corridor will be a nice route until things can progress more Eastbound.
User avatar
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5380
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next

#5103 Post by oldmanclippy » 03 May 2021 18:14

I think we'll have:

Texas Q2 2022
Montana Q4 2022
Oklahoma Q2 2023
Arkansas+Louisiana Q4 2023
Kansas+Nebraska Q2 2024

I'm not entirely convinced that Kansas will be a standalone state. While it would be nice to get density commensurate with the number of road miles IRL, I don't think SCS is going to spend time making *Kansas* the most dense state in the game by a long shot, which it would have to be in order to warrant being released standalone at this point IMO. I think they'll do Kansas and Nebraska bundled together with a medium density. SCS doesn't operate exactly as it is in real life so I don't know if they're reading into Kansas's extensive road network as much as we are when they are planning map DLCs. Plus Kansas is also very easy to map compared to other dense states like Washington and Colorado, so I really don't see it being standalone. Similarly, I'm not convinced that they'll move to 3 releases per year. That puts a lot of stress on the testers and I don't think once every 4 months is a pace they can keep. With ETS2, that would be 4 to 5 (if ETS2 ever went to 2 per year) map releases per year across the games, which would be too much IMO. Better to spread the releases out and allow the marketing for each one to breathe. I think that the third map team will simply just work ahead instead of working on an extra release per year. But I could be proven wrong and I would of course welcome more frequent releases, but I think fewer releases with bigger sizes is the route SCS will take, especially with each ETS2 map getting bigger and bigger instead of switching to 2 medium sized expansions per year.
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | see profile for link to Germany cities and Switzerland rework maps
prediction maps: Greece | ATS 2024-2025 DLCs
research map: Upper Midwest (work in progress)
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30158
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next

#5104 Post by flight50 » 03 May 2021 18:52

I've actually always said to keep it Summer and Winter for the same reason you mentioned....stress. But with Texas throwing things off, a Spring release is possible. So I am starting to rethink that if they keep states as solo, 3 is states/releases is possible. But technically your 2023 prediction is 3 state releases. Its really not much different than what I was saying. Now for Kansas and Nebraska, that is a lot to do for a normal map team. Its easier mapping but both those together is larger than Colorado that took (1) team 12+ months. Its larger than NM, than Idaho, than Utah, than Oregon....thats a lot of space to map. They need a super team....(2) map teams to do a bundle. Texas is basically a bundle and we are already 2+ years in development. But the time it releases, it will be 3 to 3.5 years in development. Texas is 2-3 states by itself. Which is the same as what I've been saying in this thread for some time advocating a super team. (1) team does Nebraska and (1) team does Kansas but release together as a combo. That is the only way we get such a dlc in a 12 month time period. Otherwise, it will take 2 years to do such a combo with (1) normal map team.

So after Texas, either they bundle states, or stick with solo releases. Solo releases will throw time off across the board with Texas being irregular, but they can't hold a dlc. If its done, they'll need to recoop that money asap. The best way imo is that after Texas, start bundling with the Texas team by keeping 20+ mappers strong while the 3rd map team is the North team. The super team could be our East Team. Once the base map is rebuilt, we should have 4 map teams and they can either combine into a second super team or they'd be the Northeast team to fill in between the East team and the North team.

Come people mention about how would they call the states if they are bundled. That is the last thing to worry about honestly. It doesn't matter what the dlc name is, we will be getting two real states. The naming convention can come later....much later. For all I care, call it the two states real name.
angrybirdseller
Posts: 3298
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next

#5105 Post by angrybirdseller » 04 May 2021 01:58

Kansas and Nebraska can be done at the same time and released as super-team, but I see them sold as separate DLC with 11.99 price tag. They wont finish the USA before 2030 anyways at the current rate, but more realistic is 2035 time frame. Have to think about the size road network as well you can easily fit 3500 miles of road in each states with out it being overcrowded. Also, Nebraska and Kansas have enough for 10 deliverable cities each same as Utah or Idaho.

The southeast states are easier to justify sold bundle is Louisiana and Arkansas even then each state will have around 2000-3000 miles in game road miles. ETS2 is different animal than ATS there no custom truck stops or even national parks even cities can go near the cores of them like ATS.

Kansas will be more work with assets and research as you have toll roads along with non-toll then you have differences in road markings and signage to complicate things with that state.

Texas will likely be 25-30 deliverable cities with around 12,000 to 20,000 in game road miles it will be similar to Iberia with more freeways than normal DLC.

They will wont move southeast till California cities are all rebuilt after Texas DLC. They will staggered the releases with ETS2 each year like 2-3 map dlc a year for ATS.
User avatar
harishw8r
Posts: 4100
Joined: 14 Mar 2020 05:52
Location: Moon
Contact:

Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next

#5106 Post by harishw8r » 04 May 2021 03:02

I feel 25-30 if bit of an underestimation. Texas is at least thrice the size of the usual ATS DLC, so everything would multiply by a factor of 3 for a good estimate. There would be at least 40-50 cities.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30158
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next

#5107 Post by flight50 » 04 May 2021 06:05

Nahhh, multiplying cities by 3 won’t work that way. That overcrowds Texas for sure. An overcrowded Texas can’t look like Iberia. That is not how the US is set up. We have to keep sense of distance all though Texas has more space than most. I’m with angrybirdseller in regards to cities. 35 cities at the most if that. Roads.......we didn’t get a miles of road count with Colorado. That was a first. Texas is at least 12-15k for sure. If it’s not, it should be.

I also agree that both Kansas and Nebraska should see at least 10 cities each with Washington like road miles at least. I’m not underestimating them at all. Now it they are as dense as Eastern Colorado, then we are s.o.l. But if we get some good density, each state will demand a full map team vs trying to do both with just one map them. US backroads takes time, assets and detailing too. If these two states are dense.....there will be plenty of roads to travel on. Outside of I-80 and I-70, both states will be dominated by US and State Hwys for sure. They both have decent grids road layout that should carve thru the states.

For Kansas, I'd like to see the primary roads be US-36, US-400, US-50, US-54 and US-160 go East to West. Then I'd love to see US-83, US-283, US-281, US-75, US-69 and US-59 go North to South.


For Nebraska, I'd like to see US-20, US-26, US-34/US-6 and US-136 run East to West. NE-71, US-385, NE-61, US-83, US-183, US-281, US-81, US-77 and US-75 run North and South.
User avatar
Cemail Cebeci
Posts: 133
Joined: 25 Jan 2020 19:51

Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next

#5108 Post by Cemail Cebeci » 08 May 2021 12:57

I think it would be better to have montana stickers for ats after Wyoming Den I think this year Wyoming Montana will be better in 2022 Texas Oklahoma because texas will not be enough this year
zachman141
Posts: 4
Joined: 11 May 2021 20:37

Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next

#5109 Post by zachman141 » 11 May 2021 21:23

I am ready for Montana to come to ATS in probably mid or late 2022. https://www.simulatorgamemods.com/wp-co ... 38-x-1.jpg Montana Image.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30158
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next

#5110 Post by flight50 » 11 May 2021 23:10

How ironic you posted this,lol. I too was just thinking about Montana and how nice it would be to complete the West. I was bored and thinking ahead so I kicked out some roads. One thing a lot of us do is speculation maps. This is not the first and won't be the last. I just finished what I think is possible for Montana for 2022 (if that is when it can release) and decided to post since I saw this post. I was going to just keep it to myself but I found the above ironic. This is the minimum density I think could happen. I'm debating about US-287 from Wolf Creek up to Shelby. Its possible but we can also achieve the same thing with I-15 and do less mapping. Montana is large but wide open flat lands for the most part so I expect to have most roads make the map.

blue - interstate
red - us hwy
purple - state hwy
yellow - 50/50 chance but we can get by without it

Culbertson, Mt depends on if its scenic.
[ external image ]
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Darsol, Google [Bot], ShadowScorpion_9 and 7 guests