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

[angrybirdseller]

Newer content is priority straight out. If some expect base map quality to be like Colorado or Idaho DLC quality level your setting yourself up for disappointment. They will bring up to high enough quality high enough so it not obvious older part of the map.

Will there be newer truck stops assets and scenery, Yes. Yes, there will be newer assets added to the base map on limited level not like typical map DLC. Will there be rebuild of all the cities not likely most will be refreshed like Flagstaff.

[bobgrey1997]

Didn't they already confirm that ALL cities will be redone?

[angrybirdseller]

I am doubtful not all base map cities need to be re-done.

[bobgrey1997]

Ah, here we are.
ALL cities (at least in California so far) will be redesigned (the word redesign hints at a full rebuild of them, as a design is the fundamental basis of a building or layout), and a list of new assets is discussed (there may be more, but the impartant assets are at least confirmed).

Even if the cities aren't rebuilt from scratch like Tonapah was, they will at least be fully reworked like Vegas was. We can expect to see Vegas done to ALL cities in California. As such, one would assume the same for Nevada and Arizona (Nevada is equally old, Arizona is also from the pre-Rescale era).
[ external image ]

[flight50]

I like AZ-260 over AZ-69. It's just as scenic. Prescott is huge. That is a lot of city to develop and that would make Prescott a marked town for sure. I'd happily take a marked city though as that gurantees depots to deliver to. On AZ-260, you can take the size of Prescott and make (5-6) small scenic cities spread out along AZ-260 for the same amount of work. Versus one huge concentrated area like Prescott and Prescott Valley. AZ-260 from I-17 all the way to US-191 pretty much just adds scenery to ATS. If detours is to take off, we need more scenic routes in the West. The West is loaded with them and they are really the only routes that allow you to not have to back track 3 hrs. I'd love to use the detours feature but there just aren't enough roads to enjoy the feature.

[Sora]

I don't really see why this needs to be a one-or-the-other situation. Prescott is a major city and should absolutely be added; ideally, alongside roads leading southwest from it like US 60 and AZ 89. AZ 260 would be a great addition east of I-17, because it would connect Camp Verde (and Prescott) to New Mexico while offering a scenic road they can show off in update videos.

AZ is potentially the state that stands to benefit most from new content rather than overhauled content - Prescott aside, the 1:35 design resulted in a number of odd network decisions and dead-ends. Several of these were addressed in later updates (like US 191, US 95, and US 93), but there are plenty of other roads that would do a great job of smoothing things out. AZ 260 and US 70 are the obvious ones, but additions like US 60/AZ 89, AZ 64 (to I-40), AZ 82, AZ 264, and potentially even US 180 (Holbrook to I-10 via Silver City NM) would all be great as well. I don't expect all of these, of course, but any one of them would be a fantastic addition.

[flight50]

^I can agree with all those. Especially US-89. We have it in game already. Its just like US-191 and US-95.....finish up the routes if other states feature them. US-50 in California also fits that, get it to Sacramento. I've seen a few request for AZ-82 as well. It does make sense. I agree that Arizona has several roads that adds valve. Add to many to the base map and you look a bit more money than already committing to a full rebuild for the base map. Technically the base map is California and Nevada only. If California and Nevada gets 80%+ revamped, that's a different story. The are the worse two. I see Arizona at like 50-60% revamped. Considering it was meant to paid, its most okay but still needs work to be on par with lets say New Mexico, Oregon or Washington. I wouldn't take Arizona beyond Oregon/New Mexico quality though. California and Nevada I'd take to Utah quality.

US-60 and US-70 really ties up loose ends. It helps with I-10 and provides an alternate more scenic route if you don't want to go thr Tucson. Detours helps here too. If US-70 is completed, we don't actually need that last portion of US-191 but it would be nice to complete US-191. It would only be like 2 miles long though. Technically, it does make more sense to have US-191 to US-70 bring us Clifton instead. It keep all that in the Arizona map.

Once the base map is updated up to Arizona, I'd take that rebuild team and make one final push thru the entire map up to Colorado. I'm thinking Wyoming and Texas could have pretty good road layouts. I'd get the rebuild team adding a few new roads to Oregon, Washington, Utah, Idaho and Colorado. 1-2 new roads per state is justifiable. The entire rebuild team could sweep thru all those dlc's in 1 year if they are only adding 1 road here.....1 road there. Adding roads to paid dlc's helps sell them as well. Some people still need to buy them. New comers to the game period will need more incentive to buy them. Southern Utah is perhaps the best example right now to add roads to increase valve. Followed by Idaho, then Colorado. Washington is really okay but Oregon can use OR-38 if nothing else. But Creating LaGrande and connect that to Lewiston would be sweet.

[bobgrey1997]

Speaking of US 191...
Sorry about this being off-topic, but I am very curious.
Can someone get be a screenshot of the intersection of 491 and 191 in south-eastern Utah? The town here in reality is called Monticello. I know there is a gas station here in-game (it's a Maverick in reality). Sadly, I can't remember how SCS did this area, and am curious how it looks.

[supersobes]

Monticello in ATS is pretty accurate to the real thing. They don't have the Maverick on US-491, but they do have the Exxon at the intersection of US-491 and US-191 (it's a BP in the game though). The scenery and road signage is pretty good and mostly accurate too.

[ external image ]

[ external image ]

[bobgrey1997]

Oh, nice. Thanks. I like this little town in reality.
I just noticed you can see one my "co-workers" in the background there. Looks like he got lost.

I am honestly surprised SCS got the area accurate. Seems like somewhere they wouldn't put much effort into beyond the intersection itself. I look forward to seeing more of these towns in California.