ATS concept map (fanmade)

IamTheOne
Posts: 147
Joined: 23 Aug 2018 19:17

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1031 Post by IamTheOne » 02 Dec 2020 20:19

fra_ba wrote:
02 Dec 2020 19:17
IamTheOne wrote:
02 Dec 2020 15:32
I do think that in order to re-do some road networks in the big Californian cities, some smaller town such as Oakland will have to be "sacrificed" in order to extent the road network properly. Oakdale wasn't much of a popular city either, but due to addition of Highway 120 to the game then the area got lots of appeal after that, and so it is extremely unlikely that they decide to remove it from the game.

Maybe get rid of that god awful attempt of Highway 50 going around Lake Tahoe near Carson City, and as the custom map shows, extend the Highway west into Sacramento while not making Lake Tahoe a very badly done side piece. The Wyoming map is very well done- I wouldn't be surprised if that's the exact road network that we are given at the state's release. Helena though in Montana, might just be a truck stop/scenic town in SCS's release.
I agree some of city choices in CA are weird! like Huron or Oakdale. Even for the case of Oakdale it's represented like a small village while in reality it's a decent-sized town. For Montana, if we assume there are around 13-14 cities in game, I'm sure they would not miss 6th largest city in the state
But with the add-on of Yosemite (Route 120) in-game then I doubt that they would like to remove Oakdale. It's more that Oakland has to be removed, because it's a rather useless location on the map and it's removal would allow for the expansion of San Francisco so that it's road network can be more similar to its real life counterpart.

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

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1032 Post by ads678 » 02 Dec 2020 21:20

IamTheOne wrote:
02 Dec 2020 15:32
I do think that in order to re-do some road networks in the big Californian cities, some smaller town such as Oakland will have to be "sacrificed" in order to extent the road network properly. Oakdale wasn't much of a popular city either, but due to addition of Highway 120 to the game then the area got lots of appeal after that, and so it is extremely unlikely that they decide to remove it from the game.

Maybe get rid of that god awful attempt of Highway 50 going around Lake Tahoe near Carson City, and as the custom map shows, extend the Highway west into Sacramento while not making Lake Tahoe a very badly done side piece. The Wyoming map is very well done- I wouldn't be surprised if that's the exact road network that we are given at the state's release. Helena though in Montana, might just be a truck stop/scenic town in SCS's release.
Helena is the capital of Montana, it will be marked city 100%.

Regarding California, there is a map of my vision of this state in the first post https://i.imgur.com/dI4nx27.jpg
The main problem of California is terrible choice of marked cities. There is no San Jose (3rd largest city in CA and 10th largest in USA!), but there is absolutely useless Hornbrook with population about 250 people. Some cities should be replaced by others, for example: Oakdale (population ~20 000) -> Modesto (~200 000), San Rafael (~60 000) -> Santa Rosa (~170 000). Also Huron, Oakdale, Hornbrook aren't actually cities in the game, but just 1-2 company prefabs.

IamTheOne
Posts: 147
Joined: 23 Aug 2018 19:17

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1033 Post by IamTheOne » 02 Dec 2020 21:50

ads678 wrote:
02 Dec 2020 21:20
Helena is the capital of Montana, it will be marked city 100%.
Oh okay, thank you for clarifying that.

My initial point was that Helena is maybe too close to Butte, but looking at it now there are cities in the Washington state DLC that are a lot closer than that. I guess they might be able to "co-exist" side by side in-game.

In regards to Californian cities, I completely agree with you: cities like Huron and Oakdale are minor cities that should probably be scrapped. I don't necessarily have a problem with Hornbrook- it makes for a good in-between with Klamath Falls and Redding, and you would just be replacing it with another town that is basically at the same location.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 19265
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1034 Post by flight50 » 02 Dec 2020 22:12

San Francisco and Oakland don't conflict at all. There is a body of water separating the two. Why would Oakland need to be removed. If anything, it needs more development. There is the bay to push down to make I-880 or just create space for I-580. If they wanted, they could make Alameda and Bay Farm Island to run CA-61 thru it and then connect I-880 to I-580. More can be done in that area. But California is a base map state so lots of reworks can be done. California is ATS's Germany.

Helena and Butte is a none factor. SCS can seriously make something out of I-15 between the two. That road is curvy enough to get distance between the two. Both cities pretty much have the same size population but at 32-34k, the towns don't need to be any larger than lets say Twin Falls.

interstate trav
Posts: 904
Joined: 23 May 2018 15:44
Location: California

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1035 Post by interstate trav » 03 Dec 2020 01:11

With how dense California is there needs to be more cities added, I’d say San Bernardino Palm Springs for example, and many as scenic. Northern California in real life has less cities then Southern California but in the game it’s very open and I have drawn my proposal for San Francisco and I think adding some freeways and expanding it is the way to do it.

Same with Southern California, I like the pazz mod for El Centro and all east of Indio, west of there I hope follows the same style.

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

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1036 Post by ads678 » 07 Dec 2020 17:44

Made more detailed map of the roads that should be added to the existing map (also added to the first post)

Image
Last edited by ads678 on 08 Dec 2020 03:11, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 19265
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1037 Post by flight50 » 07 Dec 2020 18:25

Ohhh I gotta save this, lol. This is actually sexy. You pretty much got every road in that most people have talked about. Only ones missing that I see a lot is US-26 in Oregon, AZ-264 and AZ-260. But I can definitely agree with this. Looking at this current map, its amazing how far we have come. Imagine one more year of more development. Maybe those two blank spots get filled in. That's another 8k-10k miles of roads that comes to ATS. All the West is in your screen shot and I soooo hope that is what 2021 brings us......a completed West.

I just don't see how its possible to do both Wyoming and Texas. Texas would have to be like 65-70% complete right now in order to make it out Oct-Dec 2021 imo. I know they can make Montana in that time from but Texas is iffy. Iberia didn't make it for his year and its huge so I have little doubt for Texas granted the Iberia team is larger than the team that would be working Texas. Not to mention, covid will still be going on for a good portion of 2021 I'm sure.

IamTheOne
Posts: 147
Joined: 23 Aug 2018 19:17

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1038 Post by IamTheOne » 07 Dec 2020 19:27

It could be though that we're only getting Wyoming in 2021, and then they'll release Texas in early 2022. I forget what the exact wording was, but I believe that they said that they would release a small DLC in order to "fill up the time" between the next small and big state DLCs. Wyoming would be to "feed the appetite" before Texas is released many months afterwards, perhaps the year afterwards.
flight50 wrote:
02 Dec 2020 22:12
San Francisco and Oakland don't conflict at all. There is a body of water separating the two.
When you're driving in-game yes, there is a body of water. But when you look at the map it's not shown.

SCS have proven time and time again that they are very flexible when it comes to playing around with the road network. If Oakland has to go so that they can properly re-do San Francisco's road network, I don't think that many of us are going to shed a tear of sadness as to what has been a very minimal city in-game.

I do hope that SCS gives the "Germany" treatment to California, it definitely needs it. As shown by OP, adding new cities and getting rid of smaller ones would be a great way to give life to the state and reposition the road network properly.

fra_ba
Posts: 466
Joined: 17 Feb 2018 09:37

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1039 Post by fra_ba » 07 Dec 2020 19:44

Not sure if they are flexible enough to remove a functional city. In its current shape, doesn't seem to me that Oakland takes so much space! Also logistically speaking in real-life Oakland seems more important compared to San Francisco.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 19265
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1040 Post by flight50 » 07 Dec 2020 20:18

Agreed. I wouldn't remove a functional city myself. Portland, Or and Vancouver, Wa are in the exact same boat. They exist nicely cross a body of water. If you plan right, both can exist. Oakland just needs to be more of factor, not removed. I don't understand the idea of removing Oakland just for San Francisco. A city that is on the other side of the water that needs a bridge anyways. For realism, if there are cities on both sides of a bridge, you pretty much have to do both cities. Removing one city just doesn't commute to me, sorry. I can't agree with removing Oakland when all they have to do is make Oakland 2020 style and not 2015 style. It just needs to be a more functional city than what it is.

Prefabs and the way SCS does things now is just too good. Removing Oakland is patching the problem instead of fixing the problem. The entire bay area and all of Southern California can definitely get the Germany treatment. Vegas was a great testament to this. It worked well for what they did. Even if 50% of the mentioned areas where redone, that is still 50% better than before. Many will say a complete rebuild but I'd take 50% if that is all the devs have time for. I'm not too greedy in these regards. 50% does bring that stuff up to speed a lot more than what it was. It doesn't have to be perfect, but feeling more immersive is key by having a bit more accuracy.

Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests