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

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30042
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

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

#1031 Post by flight50 » 11 Oct 2021 13:55

^Yeah I agree with all that you said. When people say Arizona is okay, that bothers me. Arizona doesn't need what California nor Nevada needs, but by no means is it good as is. The textures, background mountains, roads and outdated base map assets need upgrades to Washington standards at the least. I use to say NM but why not go a tad higher. Everything new will more than likely be Idaho, Colorado or Wyoming quality though because that is where they are standard wise.

Now Arizona can easily hold up til Cali and Nevada are redone, but it can't go untouched. SCS is on a totally different level now so keeping the same high standards are a must. If they want to sell more and get more support, all the map needs to be on par. Pavel acknowledged this and I believe that is where we are headed.
User avatar
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5300
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

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

#1032 Post by oldmanclippy » 11 Oct 2021 14:11

Arizona should be reworked to *reworked New Mexico* standards, i.e. realistic intersections, better foliage, less generic base map buildings, etc. New Mexico just needs a couple missing roads filled in and better road/mountain/distant terrain textures, and maybe bringing in some generic architecture made for Texas back into New Mexico to get rid of the last vestiges of base map blandness. Intersections are mostly realistic in NM so the focus can be tighter on facelifting rather than overhauling.

With regards to San Jose, I trust the dds file on that one. Leaving San Jose out means leaving out the 10th most populous city in the US. San Jose has ~50% more people than Las Vegas, Portland, Seattle, or Denver, for comparison. It is more populous than 3 of the 6 "big Texas cities" that SCS will have to tackle. Chicago, Philadelphia, and New York will be the only post-Texas cities that are more populous than San Jose. SJ doesn't get a lot of the attention population-wise since it's in the same state as San Francisco, San Diego, and Los Angeles, but in actuality it's *more* populous than San Francisco even.

Population isn't the end-all-be-all in terms of which cities get added to ATS, but to ignore one that is in the top 10 is a no-go for me. San Jose needs to be part of the CA reworks, full stop. San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland together should represent one of the most complex multi-urban areas in all of ATS, along with DFW, the Twin Cities, Baltimore-DC, NYC-Newark, Tampa-St. Petersburg, etc. Yes, the CA rework is a daunting task, but a necessary one to promote the long-term growth of ATS. To let CA/NV fester in mediocrity for too long is to give away opportunities at hooking new fans and converting them into repeating paying customers for the next ten years. It is an up-front cost that will surely pay for itself over time.
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | see profile for link to Germany cities and Switzerland rework maps
prediction maps: Greece | ATS 2024-2025 DLCs
research map: Upper Midwest (work in progress)
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30042
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

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

#1033 Post by flight50 » 11 Oct 2021 15:00

^Good post. I totally agree on San Jose. That metro area would be a huge lift for the California rebuild and no way the top 10 cities don't make ATS. The way SCS maps now, I'm confident in a total redesign. Hopefully the economy gets that major boost as well. I'm glad SCS isn't rushing the cities in California though. That means, they are taking their time and getting the right asset made where they need new ones. If cities came in ph 1, I fear they would have been rushed and that defeats the purpose imo.

I honestly think that once Texas is out the door next yeaer, the people that built the major cities there, will be the ones we need in California...no question. That is why I keep saying to fast track I-80 East of Sacramento to West Wendover. Winnemucca and Elko are much much smaller cities and can either be avoided too or reworked since they are so small. Its the huge cities in California and Reno that can be skipped until the Texas city builders can rework California. Montana has Idaho/Wyoming sized cities. The team that did Wyoming can deal with Montana cities easily so no Texas city builders need there. But the city builders in Texas are a must to go to California imho.
User avatar
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5300
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

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

#1034 Post by oldmanclippy » 11 Oct 2021 19:17

flight50 wrote: 11 Oct 2021 15:00 I honestly think that once Texas is out the door next yeaer, the people that built the major cities there, will be the ones we need in California...no question.
Especially since Oklahoma has 2 major cities, Louisiana has 3, Arkansas has 1, Kansas has 1 or 2 (Wichita for sure, the expert-required part of Kansas City could likely only come with Missouri). Point being that there will be opportunities in the post-Texas landscape to loan out Texas' city experts to the base map.

There's a couple ways to define "major cities". I only care about cities with reasonably complex interchanges and noticeable urban downtown centers, so no Bakersfield, Las Cruces, or Fort Collins for example as those don't require expert city mappers IMO. In my opinion, it roughly breaks down as follows (with of course many many exceptions and it's open to interpretation):

Tier 1 (multiple and more complex major interchanges and larger and more complex urban center + more exceptional in size or complexity than T2):
Los Angeles (T3 in-game)
San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose (T3 (SF), smaller than T4 (Oakland), and scenic at best (SJ) in-game)

Tier 2 (multiple or more complex major interchanges and/or larger or more complex urban center):
San Diego (T3 in-game)
Phoenix
Portland
Seattle
Denver

Tier 3 (fewer or less complex major interchanges and/or smaller or less complex urban center):
Sacramento (T4 in-game)
Las Vegas
Reno
Tucson
Salt Lake City
Albuquerque

Tier 4 (fewer or less complex major interchanges and/or smaller or less complex urban center than T3):
Fresno (smaller than T4 in-game)
Spokane
Boise
Colorado Springs

The trend we can see is that the California cities are represented in-game at a smaller magnitude than they are in real life. We currently don't have any T1 cities in-game, as LA and the Bay Area haven't been reworked yet. Phoenix gets the nod for "most major" representation in-game IMO with Denver close behind. Those could be in a separate T1.5 but I think they're a lot closer to Portland/Seattle than they are to what LA/Bay Area should be.

For upcoming states, these are the tiers IMO:

Texas:
Houston: T1
DFW: T1
Austin: T2
San Antonio: T2
El Paso: T3
Corpus Christi: T4
Amarillo: T4
Beaumont: T4 (implementation dependent)

Montana: all below T4

Oklahoma
Oklahoma City: T2
Tulsa: T3

Louisiana
New Orleans: T2
Baton Rouge: T4
Shreveport: T4

Arkansas
Little Rock: T3

Kansas
Wichita: T3
Kansas City, KS/Overland Park: T4 (implementation dependent)

Nebraska
Omaha: T2
Lincoln: T4 (implementation dependent)

Mississippi
Jackson: T4

Alabama and Missouri start to bring more "major cities", but until then there's plenty of time to send Texas' experienced city builders to the base map. The base map needs tier-increasing overhauls for Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, San Diego, Sacramento, and Fresno (and a conversion from San Rafael to San Jose), along with Reno, Phoenix, Tuscon, and the rest of the base map cities needing reskins to overhauls themselves.

Texas needs 8 (9 if you count D+FW separately) "major cities", which is the same number of "major cities" as in all the paid DLCs so far, except the median tier of the Texas cities is 2.5 vs 3 for the previous paid DLCs. And Texas introduces two Tier 1 cities which we don't have any in-game yet. That talent can't just fester away waiting for Missouri/Illinois/Florida. That's where the base map rebuilds can come in handy.
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | see profile for link to Germany cities and Switzerland rework maps
prediction maps: Greece | ATS 2024-2025 DLCs
research map: Upper Midwest (work in progress)
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30042
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

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

#1035 Post by flight50 » 12 Oct 2021 02:07

I agree on the definition of major city. The T2’s are currently the spotlights of ATS. Once Texas gives everyone a taste of T1, the craving for California reworks it’s going to be super strong. California should easily get 2 T1’s with the Bay Area and LA. The top 10 cities in the US must feel like it in ATS. Unfortunately, these areas are so huge, that we won’t get anything too close to town center as far as depots. No room more than likely but it’s all to be expected. The interchanges just to get off would be too messy and wouldn’t feel right.

Phoenix and San Diego are both in the top 10 largest cities. They need to feel like major cities in SCS’s new methods for mapping. Portland, Seattle and Denver shouldn't out due a top 10 city. California has plenty of cities to uplift the state. Patience from the community will be necessary though. City experts can easily eat up several months on a major city alone. They need it to bring the right vibe. But just as the expert is necessary, they need an equally talented asset team to bring it to life. The mapper gets all the glory, but it’s the assets as a collection that brings immersion.
Trucker Nik
Posts: 2146
Joined: 27 Feb 2021 10:29
Location: Trenčín, Slovensko

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

#1036 Post by Trucker Nik » 12 Oct 2021 15:36

I think there's a good chance of getting a second of rework phase for California + all cities in update 1.43
angrybirdseller
Posts: 3292
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

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

#1037 Post by angrybirdseller » 12 Oct 2021 15:42

Phoenix is very suburban like its not very dense city to start with its massive in land area larger than New York City. Still, New York City has 27,000 people per square mile while Phoenix is 3100 people per square mile. Los Angeles and San Francisco the layouts will change more with rebuild, but San Diego think layout works fine just needs new prefabs and art assets. The larger city the more they cut out based on 1:20 scale. Los Angeles the I-405 connecting to the sea ports is important, but I-5 really does not go near downtown Los Angeles while I-10 little better. The larger the city the more have to cutout and simplify things.
User avatar
TheAmir259
Posts: 283
Joined: 12 Sep 2018 12:51
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

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

#1038 Post by TheAmir259 » 12 Oct 2021 16:19

Not sure what you meant by all cities rework, if you mean just a facelift then probably. But if a drastic layout rework, highly unlikely for all, given that some stuff mentioned like the Bay area and Los Angeles might actually be better off with a proper, drastic rework that is actually tied to their surrounding, because we still don't know how far off might they be road connections be dragged back by.

Anyways, the stretch between Los Angeles and San Diego might actually benefit from a total rework in that if they actually dragged the I-5 further west (closer to the coast), they might be able to give a bit more space for I-15 to properly align and intercept the other roads/highways towards their southern end.
Two wrongs don't make a right, three lefts...do :D
Trucker Nik
Posts: 2146
Joined: 27 Feb 2021 10:29
Location: Trenčín, Slovensko

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

#1039 Post by Trucker Nik » 12 Oct 2021 17:48

@TheAmir259 I think of reworking cities the way cities in Germany or Las Vegas got it
User avatar
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5300
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

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

#1040 Post by oldmanclippy » 13 Oct 2021 13:13

@TheAmir259 Move I-5 further west and get rid of Carlsbad, the most senseless city in either game. Replace it with San Bernardino or Riverside (if there's room) if need be, just get rid of Carlsbad. We already got Hornbrook switched to Hilt so there's precedent.
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | see profile for link to Germany cities and Switzerland rework maps
prediction maps: Greece | ATS 2024-2025 DLCs
research map: Upper Midwest (work in progress)
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: rbsanford and 8 guests