Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

User avatar
rbsanford
Posts: 2007
Joined: 15 Sep 2018 02:11
Location: Duluth, MN

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#501 Post by rbsanford » 11 May 2021 04:26

There are some redwoods on the current US 101, just south of Eureka. But if the 101 is getting a makeover, I'd love to see Richardson Grove.

The Sequoia is just one type of redwood, and they only grow on the western slopes of the Sierra Nevada. The only way we'd be able to see those is with roads in Sequoia National Park. Maybe that fictional road between Fresno and Independence could be revamped to CA 180 (which goes through the park) and a fictional pass that more accurately shows the ruggedness of the terrain.
The Journeys of Zephyr of the American West

Handy maps and diagrams.

Furthermore, I consider that I-80 across Nevada must be redone next.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30164
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#502 Post by flight50 » 11 May 2021 04:40

Yeah I was gonna mention that we have a few in the game and Sequoia's have more than one species. These are off US-199 and I remember passing thru a few on US-101. These are more than likely the ones rbsanford is referring to.

[ external image ]
User avatar
Bedavd
Posts: 1651
Joined: 31 May 2018 15:09
Location: Michigan -> Washington

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#503 Post by Bedavd » 11 May 2021 05:28

Y'all I'm so friggin excited for this rework. I feel like if we get more rework content with 1.42 around the end of the year it could easily hold me over for a longer Texas development time. Particularly if they do some city reconstructions. I would basically never leave NorCal if we got a hot new Redding and Sacramento and maybe Chico in between.
Check out my Michigan research map!
Check out my ATS IRL map! -> Leave any feedback in my thread!
Kansas added! Up-to-date blog photo locations for upcoming states also included.
Shiva
Posts: 4975
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#504 Post by Shiva » 11 May 2021 07:27

Greater LA: why not 2 airports? https://www.google.com/maps/dir/FedEx/3 ... 754185!3e0
This is just some of the possible places. Not the road layout itself.
Port of Long Beach, is so big that I do not have a clue of what to have in or not.
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: 30164
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#505 Post by flight50 » 11 May 2021 08:17

@Bedavd Yeah I agree. If 1.42 is more around xmas time, that should put us over til Spring. I honestly don't think Texas will go Summer of 2022. That would be 3.5 years in development and even no ETS2 map has gone that distance. Yes Texas is larger but only in area. Not all of Texas is dense by any means. 3 years should be good enough for Texas....1 year to go.

@Shiva no other place on the map has (2) airports so close together. Not even (1) state has more than (1) airport. I only see Texas as the only state having multiple airports and that DFW and Houston. If Texas wasn't so large, it wouldn't get 2 either. Ontario, Ca airport takes up space when something else could easily go there.
User avatar
Sora
Posts: 2183
Joined: 22 Feb 2017 18:47

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#506 Post by Sora » 11 May 2021 09:49

I would argue that LAX/SFO would be reasonable, and Florida isn't impossible to do it for either (though it's a distant third.)

I definitely don't see a single city getting two, though. They don't even consistently do one anymore.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30164
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#507 Post by flight50 » 11 May 2021 13:32

Yeah I use to think a state's largest city gets one. Salt Lake messed that up. But Boise didn't get one. I then started thinking it was a matter of city population added to the mix. Boise is out of the top 30. It seems as though a top 30-ish city ( but only one) gets in per state.

SFO wouldn't be a bad idea but they have to take advantage of the water on both sides of the bay for it to fit. That strip of land is quite narrow for 1:20. We have to get both US-101 and CA-1 South of it. I'd rather see San Jose squeeze in than SFO provided. If both fit, even better. Chances are, not even San Jose is added though but it really needs to be. Its a US top 10 city and its booted. Oakland and San Francisco are much smaller in population.

For me, the biggest improvement for the Bay area is modifying the red roads below. Remove or adjust. CA-1 need to be on he coastline. Its taking up way to much space. It needs to push into the water as much as possible. This gives US-101 more space. Whatever road that is connecting I-5 to US-101 can go. San Jose can go there and make a better Oakland. I'm not sure if its just me or not, but a small portion of the Bay bridge can be reduced to allow just a little be more of Oakland West of I-580. That bridge seems a bit longer than it needs to be. But that's just my opinion.

[ external image ]
Shiva
Posts: 4975
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#508 Post by Shiva » 11 May 2021 17:19

San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge, that is quite fine. What would need to be redone, is the SF side on/offramps.
And regarding The bridge scale? It is already reduced, if comparing to Golden Gate. So, from me, a big fat NO to reducing the scale of San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge.
If reducing it even more, than SCS has done, then it is as well as to remove it completely.

CA-1 moved west? I do agree.

SFO airport?
I'm more worried about the north/south space the airport takes, than the west/east.
If United Cargo, then https://www.google.com/maps/dir/37.2135 ... 47!1m0!3e0

What routes in SF rebuild?
CA-1, to SFOB Bridge, to US-101 https://www.google.com/maps/dir/37.6039 ... 54!1m0!3e0

US-101 to SFOB Bridge to US-101, via The Embarcadero https://www.google.com/maps/dir/37.6233 ... m0!1m0!3e0
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
Sora
Posts: 2183
Joined: 22 Feb 2017 18:47

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#509 Post by Sora » 11 May 2021 17:45

Oh, I definitely don't see it happening for space reasons, don't misunderstand - the Bay Area is already a crapshoot just trying to preserve SF and Oakland, never mind everything else nearby. But if they theoretically had infinite space to work with, it would absolutely be a case where a second airport would be fair.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30164
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#510 Post by flight50 » 11 May 2021 17:48

For me, a bridge does nothing but take up more space and only gets you across a body of water robbing you of land. I'll take more land any day if it gets me more depots to deliver to. If pushing I-580 West about the size of a major interchange can give me these 3 stores, I'll take less bridge all day long. ATS is 1:20 scale vs 1:19 for ETS2 and that lil bit of a difference can matter in tight cities. In real life the bridge curves anyways so its not even accurate and need to be redone. The hill climb West is not subtle at all. Make up that distance in the curve. Oakland is pretty much non existent right now and needs a huge makeover. It needs the space more than a bridge that can be exaggerated over the water. But that's just my thinking on what I'd like.

If California is getting a real good sweep thru, I see it as a brand new dlc. Not just graphically updates. They have a chance to make California just as good as the best dlc so far. So anything that didn't make it last time, trying to get it in. All the companies that were passed up, get them in now. Its much harder to implement them later. I keep mentioning a solid 12-18 companies all over the place that are national chains and could come to ATS but the devs aren't budging much on giving ATS new companies and I don't understand what ATS is deprived of new companies.

[ external image ]

[ external image ]
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ShadowScorpion_9 and 5 guests