Utah Discussion Thread

ads678
Posts: 355
Joined: 27 Nov 2018 15:56
Location: Eastern Europe

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2781 Post by ads678 » 07 Dec 2020 02:31

@rbsanford I don't see a possibility to connect UT-24 and I-70 without rebuilding existing map. Connection between Cedar City and Panguitch via UT-14/148/143 looks even better actually, I agree. UT-9 would be a nice bonus, but I'm not sure about space for it.

@flight50 I agree with you about UT-30, would be nice to have this road too. Also Delta was on my concept, but I don't expect SCS to add new marked cities to existing map tbh.
Hanksville as marked city would work if UT-24 and I-70 connection was possible, otherwise it doesn't make much sense. Plus Monticello is 10x bigger town than Hanksville (but still very small).

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 19258
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2782 Post by flight50 » 07 Dec 2020 03:22

Yeah I don't expect them to do anything extra with Utah but it would be nice and it would get more people to buy it. Monticello may be bigger but its currently in the game like Delta and neither are marked. I don't think SCS has ever taken a scenic town and made it marked. This is why Hanksville would have a slim shot at being marked if UT-24 to UT-95 came. There's nothing specially about Hanksville and its super tiny but it does give us something to deliver to along that path to get people to travel that road if it came. Clifton was added as a marked town as it only gives us a Tidbit and Coastline with a gas station. Hanksville can be Tonopah like with only one depot too. There are 2-3 gas stations in Hanksville. All we'd need is one of those for fueling up, deliver fuel, maybe use one of the green lots as something from farming and the last option is to use one of those scrap yards.

But even better than Hanksville is Lymon/Loa, Bicknell or Torrey/Teasdale. Hanksville could be scenic but if we got one of the other three, there's definitely green farming fields that can take place. Add in a Bitumen prefab for a roadworks somewhere, Plaster & Sons construction somewhere. Whether its a new building site or a brand new construction prefab that could get recycled elsewhere. There is also always Olthon Homes that can happen. Then you have Gallon gas that can provide a spot to deliver or fuel up. There's even a small lumber company off UT-24 that could come. The place looks deserted from Google Maps but they seem to actually be active. https://thousandlakelumber.com/. They do log homes which is interesting I think. This is where the new prefab can come into place. Make logs here for log cabins. Currently we have lumber as in 2x's. This log company makes Olthon homes valid as a new log cabin prefab. In Lymon/Loa, it appears that there are 2-3 locations to do a Bucknell Farm if you ask me.

So in my opinion, UT-24 has a lot of value to it. Just connect it up with UT-12 and UT-95 to justify it all. I'll try to always find some usage out of a road if its an approve STAA route. No matter how big or how small, everyone needs a truck to some degree to supply a town. Typically there is always at least 1 depot to deliver to. I always like to find at least 3-4 possible depots to justify a town as marked. The more possible options, the higher the chance that SCS just might see it the same way. But Southern Utah should really get filled out to utilize all that empty space and showcase that beautiful scenery.

killingjoke28336
Posts: 131
Joined: 02 Sep 2019 12:50

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2783 Post by killingjoke28336 » 07 Dec 2020 10:28

What about the 276 and the ferry crossing Bullfrog Bay? They could make a ferry crossing animation like they did in Romania. That would be cool to take the scenery in.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 19258
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2784 Post by flight50 » 07 Dec 2020 14:55

Trucks are to heavy for that ferry. That's a passenger ferry, not commercial. Its to easy to go around such a small body of water with UT-95.

User avatar
Tarso
Beta tester
Posts: 7968
Joined: 04 Apr 2016 11:03
Location: -5.865761, -35.216600
Contact:

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2785 Post by Tarso » 07 Dec 2020 15:18

@ads678 Not even using the tricks they used to make US12 and the Yakima Sunshine Crops access so close to each other?

Not saying they would add it, but after seeing how close they are ingame without interfering, i think the map can be close to stacked up like that

Shiva
Posts: 2540
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2786 Post by Shiva » 07 Dec 2020 15:41

Regarding the Lake Powell Ferry crossing? "Hey, flight50, I'm still writing this, just did a Preview check at 16:09CET, yeah, I have been writing, checking etc since.. more than 1hour 20minutes.
It can take cars, mobile homes, trucks, trailers. I have not found any length nor tonnage limits, yet. This text finished at 16:12CET"
https://www.udot.utah.gov/connect/curre ... -crossing/
https://www.udot.utah.gov/connect/wp-co ... hedule.pdf
Some info about the ferries https://www.lake-powell-country.com/lak ... rries.html
Questions tho, is there space for this?
rbsanford wrote:
06 Dec 2020 18:35
The 95/24/12 network could be more logistically useful if the 24 were continued west from Torrey and connected to I-70 at Richfield via the 119, which is very scenic as it descends into the Sevier Valley among the Rainbow Hills. This would offer an alternate route between Salina and points southeast.
I did too checkout that when Utah was released. And I agree.
Or use the connection to Salina. Bridge ingame, tunnel under I-70/US-89 IRL. As far as I remember.
Yep. UT-24 going over I-70, instead of below it, as IRL.
Map
1. Ingame US-50/UT-24 intersection.
2. I-70 underpass, IRL. Ingame UT-24 goes over I-70.
3. UT-24/UT-119 intersection.
4. UT-24/UT-12 intersection.
5. UT-24/UT-95 intersection.

Ah yeah, Richfield. I think this spot is ingame.

UT-12/UT-24/UT-95 restrictions etc. + bypass on UT-12!
ads678 wrote:
06 Dec 2020 20:08
Utah for me is the weakest paid DLC. Release of the state felt a little bit rushed. It has poor road network, sometimes mediocre quality textures and bad optimization.
There should be UT-14, UT-12, UT-24 and UT-95. Make Monticello marked, so these routes will make more sense. Also add US-6 and US-89 as alternate routes to I-15.
This is how I think the map should look https://i.imgur.com/FHXbrX5.jpg
Have fun trying to fit in UT-14 or UT-14/148/143.
If those are wanted, the whole area, including Cedar City, Panguitch etc, have to be rebuilt and relocated
I personally, would rather try to do the road between Coleville WA and Sandpoint ID.

US-6 on your map, that could maybe be worked in. Partly.
Something like this?
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: 19258
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2787 Post by flight50 » 07 Dec 2020 16:11

Shiva wrote:
07 Dec 2020 15:41
Regarding the Lake Powell Ferry crossing? "Hey, flight50, I'm still writing this, just did a Preview check at 16:09CET, yeah, I have been writing, checking etc since.. more than 1hour 20minutes.
It can take cars, mobile homes, trucks, trailers. I have not found any length nor tonnage limits, yet.
Yeah, I just looked in the Rand McNally and its actually yellow. My bad. I thought I remember seeing a local mention that route doesn't allow trucks. The truck guide book does say its STAA though. SCS would do one or the other I'm sure. Which ever is less work or most inspiring its what they'd do perhaps. Imo, its not a lengthy enough body of water to valid a ferry, but length doesn't matter I suppose.

rbsanford
Posts: 1184
Joined: 15 Sep 2018 02:11
Location: Duluth, MN

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2788 Post by rbsanford » 07 Dec 2020 18:29

I don't think the 276 would make sense as an addition, unless there could be a random event, like a rock fall or a damaged bridge on the 95 (the latter being a reference to Edward Abbey), that would necessitate a detour.

What about the 261? With the 95, it could be an alternate route to the 163 and 191. The only issue is the Moki Dugway. IIRC, the 261 is yellow in the truckers' atlas; if so, should it be?
Check out my Imgur page for ATS screenshots, railfanning, ship spotting, and more!
Latest screenshot album: Vol V: the Colorado Experience

Handy maps and diagrams.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 19258
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2789 Post by flight50 » 07 Dec 2020 18:46

Actually yes 261 is yellow. I don't see how though but I guess if US-40, US-550 and US-160 can be yellow, why not, lol. That means that ID-21 should be yellow but its not. If we don't get UT-95 to US-191, then getting 261 to US-163 works imo. As long as we can get something filled in for Southern Utah, I think all is good. Something is better than nothing. This areas is one of the largest holes in the game.

ads678
Posts: 355
Joined: 27 Nov 2018 15:56
Location: Eastern Europe

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2790 Post by ads678 » 07 Dec 2020 23:10

Tarso wrote:
07 Dec 2020 15:18
@ads678 Not even using the tricks they used to make US12 and the Yakima Sunshine Crops access so close to each other?

Not saying they would add it, but after seeing how close they are ingame without interfering, i think the map can be close to stacked up like that
Are you talking about I-70/UT-24 connection? To make this happen SCS should remove existing rock formations or rebuild the map to move I-70/US-191 junction to the east, which is highly unlikely.

Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Freeze338 and 7 guests