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: 30161
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

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

#5541 Post by flight50 » 03 Dec 2021 20:58

Yes they can do Overland. But I see overland as a suburb. KC is the proper. Its kinda like DFW. There shouldn't be an Arlington nor Denton, it all gets absorbed under the city proper. If they plan it right, sure it can work, but you also piss some people off. What if someone wants Kansas but not Missouri. SCS has to always think about multiple scenarios what a fan might do or might not do. What if a fan can't afford Missouri but can Kansas. Many people still don't own all the dlc's. Especially ETS2 fans that do not want to invest money into both games and buy all maps.

KC in its entirely is best with Kansas. Its the big ticket city for it. St. Louis is the marketable city for Missouri. I'd go something like this:
Kansas - Kansas City, Wichita, Topeka, Liberal, Garden City, Dodge City (scenic with remote depot from Garden City) and Salina. There needs to be a solid 8-9 though. Manhattan is too close to Topeka. Topeka is too close to KC as is but Topeaka can't be left out. Topeka cheats West along I-70 in may opinion. No I-335. Bring in parts of US-75 from Dallas up North. Cheat US-75 West a tad to get it to fit. If I had to guess some roads, I'd say US-83, US-36, US-69, US-75, US-160, US-50 and US-54 are the main roads for Kansas. Along those routes, we'll need some cities added to that list of 6. I'd say 8 is the minimum city count though.

We can use something on US-36. If we can get that as the Northern most road, we good. Atwood, Oberlin, Norton and Phillipsburg are the best options on the West side of the state. Belleville, Washington and the best option is Marysville in the East. 2 along that route gets us to 8 at least. I'd then try to get one in the Southeast portion of the state. Something off US-75 or US-69. US-69 is like US-385 in Colorado or like US-85 in Wyoming that we did not get as the border the Eastern border of the state. Pittsburg is one option there. Its loaded with industry actually. We could get 5-6 depots there. Then there is Fort Scott in which would be a must if we get US-54 thru the entire state. Fort Scott makes Pittsburg scenic or a remote depot there perhaps. We know that SCS typically leaves out the Southeastern part of a dlc. But states get smaller now so leaving out huge parts of a dlc won't make much sense anymore. I think we should be able to get from Tulsa, OK to Kansas City via US-69 if we choose. So now we sitting at 9 cities for Kansas. Minimum Kansas could look something like the below. It spreads out the cities and the roads fairly evenly and connect cities with good distance between them to give us that open road feel of the Great Plains.

[ external image ]



Missouri - St, Louis, Springfield, Joplin, Columbia, Jefferson City and St. Joseph are the larger ones. That only gives us 6. We could use 3 more here as well. We'll have I-55 now so perhaps, a metro area of Hayti and Caruthersville to get something off the Mississippi. There are truck stops and decent industry in the Southeast portion of the state. There is also the Marston/Howardville/New Madrid area off I-55 that can also bring industry off the Mississippi. Then there is the Minor/Sikeston area that has ATS worthy industry. Last option is Cape Girardeau. It too is off the river and has good industry. So between Memphis and St. Louis, we'll need a good marked city. The preference should be to get something that has industry off the Mighty Mississippi for sure. So I'd go with Cape Girardeau. Its pretty much in the middle and could cheat South a hair to give more space between St. Louis and Memphis.

So we are up to 7 cities now. I'd try something in the North and Northeast to spread it out. We'll get I-29 and I-35 for sure. I-29 can go St. Joseph since US-36 and I-29 meet there. I already have St. J marked though. So lets go with something off I-35. Lets go Bethany. There's a solid 3-4 depots there. We don't need much. It has a small truck stop, Walmart, Orscheln Farm and Home (Farmer's Barn), Pettijohn car dealership and the Bethany Quarry. That makes a nice little city for me. So 8 cities now. If we still on track with US-36 and US-54, that puts us in line with Hannibal, Mo. Now here is another Portland/Vancouver area. But this one can work out. Two towns here are quite small with Hannibal and Quincy. Both are off the Mighty Mississippi so more chances to get industry here. This could make a nice little metro area though. Plan it right and there is nothing to conflict here space wise. We'll need the small I-72 connector later to get into Illinois.

Last but not least, Poplar Bluff. This gives us 10 cities along routes that either continue from previous dlc's or ones that would be good to add. Now below is a bare minimum. I think a little more density can come but I'll hold here as a base line. I haven't looked at ADS678 fanmade map as I'm checking out possible industry in each of these for Kansas and Missouri. I actually forgot about it. But he's pretty much spot on for the most part with his prediction. They highlighted cities could work though. These are green states so trees everywhere that should make mapping less complicated than the mountains imo.

[ external image ]
Shiva
Posts: 4970
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

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

#5542 Post by Shiva » 04 Dec 2021 23:19

flight50 wrote: 03 Dec 2021 07:22 Portland/Vancouver is the exact reason I say all or nothing. Vancouver was squeezed in because Portland took up so much space. This pushed the entire Columbia river area North too far which made Longview a very short trip. A better city can happen if everything is made at once. That way all the piece fit in as one. Over all the Washington dlc is good but it feels a bit crammed on the Western portion of the state. I bet if all the pieces for KC was put in place during the same dlc, vs just talking about what will go in which out ever placing prefabs there, the city would be presented better.
Ah, Portland Oregon?
Portland itself is very north, due to the other cities on I-5, south of it.
Vancouver WA, yes, it did shorten the trip to Longview, but not much. Biggest blame can be placed on Portland. And the other cities south of it.

I do think that they can get dual cities to fit in the future.
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.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30161
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

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

#5543 Post by flight50 » 05 Dec 2021 06:18

Shiva wrote: 04 Dec 2021 23:19 I do think that they can get dual cities to fit in the future.
Agreed but only if they plan ahead....and very well. Building the roads first is the best plan they could have. The roads need to be built way ahead of the full production teams. Essentially, they should have a C2C base map setup with just road infrastructure. At least be 1-2 dlc's ahead. They can work in unison with the asset team. They too much stay ahead of the mappers as much as possible. Get everything worked out with the roads. What junction fits, what doesn't. If you now what fits, then do the 1:1 areas and detail out the depicted environments.
angrybirdseller
Posts: 3303
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

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

#5544 Post by angrybirdseller » 05 Dec 2021 10:12

Kansas City should go to Missouri to be honest as you have to worry about how much of Missouri side to build on. Kansas is alone is large enough for 10 cities no problems at all there. Topeka, Wichita, Dodge City, Liberal, Hays, Salina, Colby, Emopria, Hutchinson, Pratt.

Missouri - Kansas City, St Joseph, St Louis, Joplin, Springfield, Jefferson City, Hannibal, Keokuk ,Bethany, Marysville, Kirksville, Popular Bluff, Branson.

Would add as much to Missouri in content as Colorado

Missouri can fit 12 cities as towns are about 60-80 miles part and adding US-63 its length is doable and US-61 the River road one cant overlook. Washington 96.6% the size of Missouri
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30161
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

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

#5545 Post by flight50 » 05 Dec 2021 10:41

And Washington was very compact. That is the limit of a state. I hope Missouri isn't that packed. Washington is great and all but its still missing the US-2 to WA-20 connection, a WA-155 to WA-20 connection and Southeastern Washington came with Idaho. It would have been nice to get from I-84 to Lewiston via OR-82/OR-3 to WA-129. Add all that up and Washington is lb for lb the densest dlc there is. That gets pretty tight when you can't spread out.

People will want a big city out of Kansas though. Not including KC is a huge mistake. Kansas needs a big ticket seller and Topeka nor Wichita is it. I'll put it in perspective a little here.
Topeka, Ks population - 126, 397k
Wichita, Ks population - 389,877k
Kansas City metro - 2.5+ million
St. Louis metro - 2.8+ million

I'd hope SCS avoids putting two huge metro areas in Missouri when one can help another dlc. The Kansas dlc cover can easily sale with KC on the cover and Missouri can easily sale with St. Louis on the cover. If Missouri got both, only one big city can be marketed on the cover. That will waste the other city. Wichita and Topeka aren't too much larger than Boise Idaho. Hopefully we get more out of Kansas than having Topeka and Wichita lead the way.

In the case of Texarkana, Texas will have a ton of big name cities so it doesn't need Texarkana. Add that one to Arkansas to help it. SCS needs to factor in what type of impact this city or than city can have if it came with this or that dlc, when it comes to border cities.
Tristman
Posts: 1543
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

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

#5546 Post by Tristman » 05 Dec 2021 11:14

Why would the DLC cover need to be a city? I doubt anyone thinks of cities when they think of Kansas anyway.

Personally, I’d see the DLC cover being fields of whatever crop they produce most of. Hopefully SCS will use Kansas as yet another opportunity to expand on agriculture.
Apparently Wichita is renown for aircraft manufacture, so maybe they could do something with that.

I still feel like Kansas City belongs to Missouri more than it does to Kansas. Wyoming was received well without a massive city, so I’m sure Kansas could also be.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30161
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

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

#5547 Post by flight50 » 05 Dec 2021 11:34

I never said it needs to be a city on the cover of Kansas. Its a thought just like you think crops can be on the cover. The cover can be anything. I just envisioned cities. Not to mention crops compared to a city is quite boring. A cover should have pop and fields of crops don't say that to me.

You also can't compare Wyoming to Kansas. Wyoming is the least populated state in the entire US, so people can't expect big cities from it. Just fyi Cheyenne is the largest city there and its population is 65k. Almost twice as small as Topeka.
angrybirdseller
Posts: 3303
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

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

#5548 Post by angrybirdseller » 05 Dec 2021 11:56

The problem with Kansas City with Kansas is I-29 and I-35 are in Missouri and 1:20 scale makes it layout more complicated than Portland and I-29 and I-35 should be continuous, but Kansas sector could add Kansas City I would avoid complex interchanges that up space are not necessary.

For example, someone gets Missouri DLC and do not own Kansas DLC have delivery from Joplin to St Joseph. Could mitigate it by having I-435 connect to I-29 then you have it connect it to I-49 then I-70 and I-435 interchange, but I-435 is all suburban and urban areas. Think mappers want to avoid building roads would not work out with scale 1:20.

With Wyoming DLC they made smart choice with Cheyenne picking easier interchange along I-80 on the west side of town instead of exit 358 as would require more work to fix and flow with map layout.

I get why people want Kansas City with Kansas, but I also know Missouri one of more important states to expand the map east.

Midwest states with deliverable cites 60-80 miles apart will work fine and Missouri would not put 16 cities in like they did with Washington DLC, but around 12 deliverable cities will work fine not so tight as there no big mountains to deal with like Washington.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30161
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

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

#5549 Post by flight50 » 05 Dec 2021 12:17

I agree I-29 and I-35 should be continuous, but Missouri has no factor to that if KC come with Kansas. Neither interstate needs to go beyond Kansas City itself until Missouri comes. SCS can easily block off the Northbound lanes to both of those just like they do with any other major roads. Arkansas will be in place before Missouri so I-49 can route South into Arkansas with no issue. If we do not get KC with Kansas, no telling where I-35 stops. Does it go to US-75, US-59 or US-69? We'll need to get to Topeka from the South somehow. I-35 linking Laredo to KC is a nice long route so whatever KC comes with, will be as far as we get on I-35 for awhile until Iowa finally comes which won't be at least another 3-5 years. Missouri may not come right after Kansas so we could be waiting for KC for a dlc or two.

I doubt we get any spurs in KC though. No I-435, No I-635. Its busy enough with I-49, I-29, I-70 and I-35 trying to go thru there. That's hell on wheels already We'll need some type of surface streets so no room for spurs. If someone doesn't by this dlc or that dlc, that is on them. There will always be a situation where something is missing if a person doesn't buy (x) dlc. On the border is even trickier but we have yet to encounter a boarder city. So companying KC to Cheyenne isn't relevant. I'd be okay with KC with one or the other but not with a split. A split just bothers me when thinking of mapping. A mapper would have to update the older part if MO doesn't follow immediately. A 2-3 year gap and they'd have to redo more things than they'd like as the city changes. Do it all at once and be done with it for several years beyond the dlc.
fra_ba
Posts: 860
Joined: 17 Feb 2018 09:37

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

#5550 Post by fra_ba » 05 Dec 2021 18:51

Some of the most important industries in KC, MO are located along I-435. For instance, here you see an intermodal yard, a rail supply yard, a chemical plant, an energy generation facility, some warehouses, a truck stop and even a Kenworth dealer. Also Here at I-435 and I-35, there is a Ford assembly plant. Anyway, without KC,MO in MO dlc, the look of Missouri dlc would so weird!
Edit: Beside two cities solution for KC, We could go even minimalistic in KC dlc and ignore everything east of Topeka-Emporia line and most of southeastern Kansas (including town of Pittsburg).
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: befsztyk, Darsol, DracoTorre and 10 guests