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

[supersobes]

Texas for 2023? I don't think so. I'd expect it to come sometime in 2022 before Montana comes. After all, Texas was announced first. And by our own speculation, it seems that Texas has already been in the works for at least two years at this point.

For my votes, I went with Oklahoma and Kansas as well. Oklahoma is definitely needed next so that Texas doesn't stand alone, and Kansas will be nice to have more I-70 to get more utilization out of that current stretch of I-70 between Denver and Burlington that we have.

[Evil_Jason]

I voted for Oklahoma. THis makes the map shape nice and edgy again because Teaxas has this cut-away shape in the north

And I would say Kansas next because if you want to go from northeast Texas to Seatle in Washingtion, you would/might pass Oklahoma and southwestern Kansas

[ external image ]

Also I did some coverage research:

Excluding Hawaii and Alaska, we have a current map coverage of about 33.648%

Texas added: 42.256%
Texas + Montana added: 46.968%

Afterwards:
Oklahoma added: 49.208%
Oklahoma + Kansas added: 51.845%

We will be having more than 50% already

[Holzauge]

Flatlander's votes here: Oklahoma & Kansas, although Louisiana is tempting and - if Florida is a destination - it would be logical... Anyway, my voting stands!

[angrybirdseller]

OK, KS, NE or OK, LA, AR - The OK, KS, NE the most logical set as expands the map east utilizes existing assets, and spares capacity to rebuild base map cities. The Louisiana and Arkansas will require art assets more so than existing great plain states. I-40, I-70, I-80 can expand these easier than I-10 in Loiusana.

[Shiva]

What if Arkansas and Louisiana ships as a single DLC after Oklahoma? Assuming Texas team is equal to three typical ATS map teams, it’s very well possible.

Just guessing, after Texas, ATS map teams might be made into two equal divisions (reskin team aside) so that each team can knock out two states at a time, so four states per year split into two DLCs.

Arkansas and Louisiana? I think it is a possibility.

On this round of votes, I'll go Oklahoma and Louisiana. With Arkansas as unwritten 2023.

[flight50]

@supersobes Sorry, that was a typo. Thanks for pointing that out though. I corrected my post. Texas started Jan/Feb 2019 so its going on 3 years. By the time it releases, it could be 3.25-3.5 years in the making.

[Bedavd]

I, too, voted for Oklahoma and Kansas because I think it makes the map a bit nicer than LA. But honestly I wouldn't be surprised or even disappointed if we saw Louisiana before Kansas, I just don't think it would be ideal. We've certainly come a long way from the gigantic L we had with only WA, OR, CA, NV, AZ, and NM

[harishw8r]

I would like to see Oklahoma followed by an ArLa DLC, so voted for OK and LA.

Now that the west would be closed properly and Texas would also be in, SCS might wanna accelerate getting to the east. I would also like to see them expanding in the other directions too i.e. Canada and Mexico, even before they finish the States. Expansion in all directions and taking turns would make the process less boring (given how boring the terrain becomes for a while), just like the way ETS2 map expansions are.

[TheAmir259]

Oklahoma is a no-brainer tbh, but as for what comes next, i would really love to see a bundled DLC. My preference would be the Dakotas, Kansas-Nebraska, Louisiana-Arkansas, & later on Mississippi-Alabama. As to how the bundle is handled, it is up to them but i can only see two options;

1) Individual DLCs for each states, but with bundle(-purchasing) option like the Pacific Northwest Bundle, all this is related to the Steam Store
2) Combined States DLCs, two states forcefully combined into just one

Number 1 is something we've seen but at the same time, not seen before. The example given, which is the PNW bundle, doesn't really resemble it as Idaho came much, much later but that is not really the biggest problem here. The biggest problem is actually that even after Texas and Montana out of the way, i'm a bit skeptical as to whether they have enough map teams to do this or not. This might mean we'll be seeing around 4 states released per year, but we also musn't forget that first, the basemap rework will also take away a bit, if not one whole map team. And second, mapping is not as easy as it sounds, and synchronizing them to make for a bundle may be an issue.

Number 2 sounds more likely with the current map team situation. But this does leave a little more disadvantage than you'd think. First is the fact that you cannot make separate purchases, second is the fact that any revamp/"maintenance" to be done on one part of the DLC will mean both states will be affected, and given how ATS has been nicely sectioned-out (almost everything placed into DLCs including trucks), this will not sit well with them. Third is pricing, having individual DLCs might actually be better for them financially, than a combined one, in which i'm anticipating a slightly higher price.

Whatever the case is, Oklahoma should definitely be the next state after Montana. To which, i would love it if they revisit the Enchanted Bundle, to be split into two bundles, one a map pack containing New Mexico, Texas & Oklahoma, and the other, the rest of it (Cargoes, Accessories & Paintjobs). I'm pretty sure Oklahoma is more than just about making the map look more squarish than what Texas did. It's gonna be the first for the Turnpike, among other things, so they definitely shouldn't be eyeing elsewhere first other than Oklahoma right after Montana.

[angrybirdseller]

Wait till Texas is done to get real clue, and betting it won't happen to OK, KS, NE, SD, ND. Louisiana and Arkansas it's possible, but depends on CEO