Colorado Discussion Thread

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 17905
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Colorado Discussion Thread

#41 Post by flight50 » 14 Feb 2020 04:48

Sounds good. Thanks for the input. 40,50,70 and 160 really all pump me up. Those roads West of I-25 is what I am waiting to see in Colorado the most. I sure hope SCS does it justice.

I can definitely see Alamosa making the game as a marked city. I has enough to bring deliverable prefabs to it for sure. Your probably right about Trinidad. It should be our first scenic town in Colorado though after leaving Raton. US-160 could hold up there. But then again, it could go to at least US-385. US-160 appears to stretch East bound a bit. It could be part of that spider web of roads once the Great Plains get to rolling. But if 160 went to 385, that gets us to a major trucking road that links up Colorado and Texas. US-24 from Colorado Springs to Limon should definitely make it. Most logical short cut to get East without having to go thru Denver if one originates from CO Springs or Pueblo.

Pueblo, CO Springs, Denver and Ft. Collins all seem like marked candidates for the Colorado dlc. They all seem to be about the same distance apart. There is enough distance of rural lands to separate them all so SCS could pull that off. We shall see. US-36 from Denver to Boulder is probably a must, I agree. It gets tricky with I-25, I-76, I-270 and US-36 so close though. That will be one crowded intersection. I don't expect to see all of 270 in though. The little bit it brings at 1/20 scale may not work well but hey ya never know. SCS has been getting some spurs/loops in. US-6 is iffy perhaps. I'd love to get it as an alternative around the tunnel for Hazardous loads. That and oversized can't go thru the tunnel so we will definitely need US-6 at the least at the Eisenhower Tunnel. West of I-25, either CO-14 or US-34 works. We probably won't get both. Considering Fort Collins probably makes the game, CO-14 seems to cause the fewest scale issues. So 14 could go from US-40 to Sterling. That route pretty much keeps us as the Northern most West to East road. A scenic route parallel to I-80 that can get us to Cheyenne as hopefully the 2021 Summer map.

One thing for sure is that with Colorado at the end of the year, the ATS map really starts to take form. Adding Wyoming will be huge and Montana will be icing on the cake. But Utah and Colorado where my most anticipated dlcs before pushing East for years. After this year, the wait should be no more.

User avatar
Xaagon
Posts: 587
Joined: 07 May 2016 02:35
Location: Colorado Springs, CO, USA

Re: Colorado Discussion Thread

#42 Post by Xaagon » 14 Feb 2020 05:21

I agree that they would struggle to fit all the highways in the Denver area. Boulder is so close to Denver that it's almost a suburb now. If it makes the game then US 36 has to be there for that stretch. When I mentioned US34/US36/US6, I was mostly thinking about the eastern part of the state where these roads become more parallel and head out into Kansas/Nebraska.

US 34 in the mountains would not be a road for trucks and is actually closed in winter. They may still add it for the scenic value like they did for the road through Yosemite in California. It would also be a technical challenge as that road follows a high mountain ridge and you'd be able to see just about forever around you. US40/CO14 generally follows a canyon and would be easier on a GPU for draw distances, also that would be the way a real truck would travel. This also would work nicely with adding US287 from Fort Collins to (eventually) Laramie, WY.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 17905
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Colorado Discussion Thread

#43 Post by flight50 » 14 Feb 2020 07:03

Sweet. CO-14 it is, lol. I'd think SCS would choose that route anyways over US-34. Once Idaho releases I am sure SCS will reveal the 2nd state in a few weeks time like last year. They must let the hype simma down from the Summer map release. That is when Colorado should get announce. It would be odd for Colorado not to be that choice. Either way, we'd all just have to cope if it ain't Colorado.

Sametbey2
Posts: 521
Joined: 22 Dec 2019 20:38

Re: Colorado Discussion Thread

#44 Post by Sametbey2 » 14 Feb 2020 09:27

I wish Trinidad was an active city. It owns a natural gas company and the CO-12 is a nice way.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 17905
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Colorado Discussion Thread

#45 Post by flight50 » 14 Feb 2020 12:56

Trinidad to Raton is way to close perhaps. Thats 21 miles apart. Its better off as scenic perhaps.

Larry71490
Posts: 2170
Joined: 08 Mar 2019 23:27
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: Colorado Discussion Thread

#46 Post by Larry71490 » 14 Feb 2020 14:09

Hopefully we get hazmat routing.

interstate trav
Posts: 841
Joined: 23 May 2018 15:44
Location: California

Re: Colorado Discussion Thread

#47 Post by interstate trav » 14 Feb 2020 18:15

Trinidad is on signs in Raton for 25 North if I remember correctly. So maybe it will just be a scenic city.

fra_ba
Posts: 445
Joined: 17 Feb 2018 09:37

Re: Colorado Discussion Thread

#48 Post by fra_ba » 14 Feb 2020 18:32

There is also a weigh station in Trinidad! Also in Trinidad exit 15 and us350 to La Junta seems to be in!

User avatar
Xaagon
Posts: 587
Joined: 07 May 2016 02:35
Location: Colorado Springs, CO, USA

Re: Colorado Discussion Thread

#49 Post by Xaagon » 15 Feb 2020 00:59

I think Trinidad is far enough away from other towns that it may be an official city. Perhaps Walsenburg would get the "scenic" treatment.

That said, I like the idea of locating some companies within scenic towns. For example, the HMS Machinery in Seligman (officially Flagstaff), the winery in Napa (officially San Rafael), the oil refinery in Vallejo (also officially San Rafael), or the winery in Weaverville (officially Eureka). Or even the stuff way out in the wilderness (most mining and logging).

I'd also like to see the cities be a lot more dense with delivery points. Any town with over 200,000 residents should have at least one Walbert, one Eddy's/Tidbit/SellGoods, one gas station you can deliver to, one Home Store/Plaster & Sons, one car dealership, etc. These can be placed right next to each other and not lose any realism.

interstate trav
Posts: 841
Joined: 23 May 2018 15:44
Location: California

Re: Colorado Discussion Thread

#50 Post by interstate trav » 15 Feb 2020 04:00

I agree. I think Trinidad could work for that.

Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: harishw8r, Rockhampton, SuchManor and 4 guests