Wyoming Discussion Thread

[clifflandmark]

Why are there unmarked towns in the first place...? I think it would be nice if there were no unmarked towns anymore. Each unmarked town that we now have should get at least one company we can deliver to/from.

this is a different issue.Unlike in Europe, small populations spread in large areas in US.

They sell hiking or camping or whatelse needed for related hobby in small resorts like Ouray, Telluride. There's no Walmart there for instance.

Even it's marked, it does not mean u deliver something there. Unless trucks don't loaded with camping or hiking materials...

Even some small resorts don't have anything besides hotel. Check out Colter Bay Village.

[flight50]

That's just it, Cody shouldn't be a dead end if YS was planned. Although if Cody isn't planned or marked day one, SCS could go back and give it the Clifton, Az treatment. SCS added US-191 well after Arizona and gave us Clifton along the way. YS to Sheridan is pretty much that scenario. In fact, it was the 1.32 update that brought Clifton. https://blog.scssoft.com/search?q=clifton. So if necessary, it could be 1.42 or 1.43. But Cody should really be a day one release city. Cody can't be scenic if YS was not planned for Wyoming. No point in a scenic dead end Cody.

Without YS, then yes Cody could be a dead end like Jackpot, Nv was for years until Idaho came. Even still, why dead end if it doesn't have to be. Sure its not ideal to go thru a National Park, but if you've been putting other parks in the game, there's no reason to not plan Yellowstone of all parks. Soooo since other parks are in, YS is a must. You get YS but then the best way to continue is with the same route that got you in the park from the West gate. Cody is along this route. Why alienate Northwest Wyoming. Lets say Cody is in and YS does not get Canyon Village to make YS itself a deliverable location. Now Cody comes into play and/or use Jackson for remote depots into YS. There is a high chance, YS doesn't get a marked city. So now SCS can maximize YS using 2 cities. If we can only get one type of depot per city, with (2) marked towns in Jackson and Cody, it maximizes Yellowstone's options like I mentioned previously.

With Jackson and Cody combined one is sure not to have a : Tidbit, Eddy's, Bitumen roadworks, Plaster & Son's Construction site, HMS machine repair or last, a gas station in which semi trucks fuel at rarely. This are the worthy YS depots imo. That is 6 depots that YS could affective have if you have (2) marked cities instead of one. So yes, Cody should be marked if you want to maximize the dlc and allow people to explore. I'll give you another example looking at the image @ads678 just posted. Look at US-40 between Steamboat and Rangley. The City of Craig could have been marked. CO-13 doesn't connect to I-70 but it will connect to I-80. Craig is in a crossroad that one could argue its validation for marked. Its just like Rangley as is passes thru while connecting major roads. FYI, Rangley had a population of 2300 people in 2010. Not telling what it is now. But the point is, its marked. So population has zero to do with marked or not. If it has industry and valid for the ATS economy....mark it. Make it deliverable.

[ external image ]


US-40 with Craig is the same thing as US-20 with Cody. Can Cody be scenic, sure it can. But you just removed the (6) depot options I mentioned. There are zero other cities that could give YS a deliverable depot. If you don't want to go thru YS, don't drive it. I'm sure those who want the ultimate immersion don't drive thru Yosemite nor Rocky Mountain National park. But for those that do not have an issue with YS, you increase your route options with US-20 and allow more exploration with the dlc. One thing we all have in common is the need for options. Whether its settings, roads, trucks or trailers...we all want that adjustability to cater to our own needs.

Why are there unmarked towns in the first place...? I think it would be nice if there were no unmarked towns anymore. Each unmarked town that we now have should get at least one company we can deliver to/from.

This boils down to separating ETS2 from ATS. There is typically more space in ATS/US in general. So to portray this, load up cities with more depots vs make more cities with fewer depots. So in ATS a large city could have 12-15 depots. A mid sized city could have 6-11 depots while as small city/town can have 1-5 depots. So ATS is tailored differently. I don't think I'd like all town having something. But I would like to see a few more 1-2 depot towns for the Great Plain states. I'd love to see tons of farming options. Change up the pace for Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota and parts of Minnesota, Montana and Oklahoma. SCS should make the Great Plains a focus on Agriculture for sure. In those remote areas, it would be quite realistic to get 1-2 depots to very low population towns. They needs supplies too. Sometimes these locations could have a nice industry addition to add to ATS. Most of this would be tagged to Farming,Oil/Gas, Renewable Energy and mining though. Take the Agricultural thread and add locations in the GP that can showcase Agriculture in the GP states.

[Knuckelhead]

I am with you flight, don't be satisfied with the minimum SCS can do but the best it can do, look at ETS2 which apparently gets all the love like Iberia 49 marked cities and 22 companies with all the cargo it can get, so why should Wyoming settle with 10 marked cities, 3 new companies and 1 new trailer. It's all about options, the more we get the more choice we have.

[xXCARL1992Xx]

i can fit the entirety of Wyoming twice into Iberia, also it is way more densely populated, should SCS now start to add cities that are made out of 1 farm just so you can get 49 cities in a state ?

[Knuckelhead]

No, it should not, Wyoming is about a third smaller than Iberia, and I know it's less populated, but for any DLC there should be a minimum it can offer, like I said it's all about having enough options in every department and ATS should not falter in that regard. It's big enough to offer more, don't you think. Why be satisfied if it can offer so much more?

[Grizzly]

edit: have u seen the promods canada thread locked ?

I just want more people to realize this lock and decided to write to most active topic, WY.

Promods have also been blocked over at ETS2. Hopefully someone just got a bit carried away...

[xXCARL1992Xx]

No, it should not, Wyoming is about a third smaller than Iberia, and I know it's less populated, but for any DLC there should be a minimum it can offer, like I said it's all about having enough options in every department and ATS should not falter in that regard. It's big enough to offer more, don't you think. Why be satisfied if it can offer so much more?

Iberia is a bit more then 2x as big as Wyoming, there is nothing a third smaller and also no, it doesnt need to give all it has to offer because then the map will start to get overcrowd, Iberia in this regard has a bit to much cities for the area it has, France only has 31 and is bigger then Iberia, so 35 cities would have been enough

[Knuckelhead]

We are asking for a marked Cody with some new companies to deliver so there could be us-14 to complete Yellowstone, is that too much to ask, why be satisfied with a bare minimum they can offer.

[saur44l]

Correct me if I am wrong,but Wyoming is supposed to be least populated state in US,it could be that the team was going for(at least in some way)to capture that felling when working on the state,thus it make sense to have a small number of marked cities.Also sometimes it is worth to take into consideration that more is not always better.Speaking of Cody I have no problems if that city is only marked,what matters is that we have it on the map,one way or the other.

[flight50]

I can agree that Wyoming has a lot more to offer than what people are giving it credit for. People keep getting hung up on desolate and low population. So what. The state is not small by any means with a great road network. Wyoming can spread out very nicely in terms of exploration. Leaving things on the table or to be desired is not a good look or trend to keep doing for ATS. Being a new map.......its still the same old stuff without something new. Its time for ATS to maximize its potential a lot more than we've been getting. Every new ETS2 map does this very well. There is always new companies and its typically 15+. ATS hasn't seen double digit new companies since Oregon and that was 2018. Cargo.........is a joke in ATS. Not much advancement there what so ever. Its like the devs don't have a care in the world. Something needs to change. I not too negative on the devs often but when it comes to ICC's, I will speak up. ICC's should be a major focus and they are not. Its a focus in ETS2, why not ATS. Will Wyoming start this..its bringing a little something with the train industry. That's a solid start. Better than nothing. Its more than Idaho did. Or will SCS sit back and wait for Texas to be that ETS2 bulk map dlc with double digit new companies and more new industries.

My thing is......why wait. Start now. Every dlc should maximize its potential if you expect people to buy it. People won't hesitate much on a purchase if they feel like they are getting a good bang for their buck. I'm quite tired of seeing Walmart, SellGoods, Plaster & Sons. These names are so repetitive. I know what real life is. I live here. Real life is also 1:1 scale, not 1:20. So yes in real life Walmart is everywhere but that doesn't mean it needs to be everywhere in ATS. At the current rate, we'll have 300+ Walmarts in ATS by the time the US is done. It just doesn't make sense to not add variety. Where are the options? Where are the competitor stores. I envy ETS2 because they do it much better. Things are done right over there to make the dlc's feel like you truly are getting something new with each new map. There is a reason why so many are resisting ATS. Trucks and maps is part of it but the gameplay is just better in ETS2. Variety in industries, cargo, depots and new companies. ATS might have an edge in graphics but what good is it if you are are a fan of gameplay. The economy needs to be more like ETS2 in ATS.

Texas will be the first state outside of the West. Wyoming will be the second to last state in the West. I can understand only a few new companies coming with Wyoming and Montana but finish them off strong with a few new companies still. Texas should start the South region super strong out the gate. If you want ATS to get that ETS2 feel, make each of the (4) major regions (West, South, Midwest and Northeast), make all regions stand out just like ETS2 does. You should feel a difference in economy along with the terrain different. Each part of the country specializing in something different than another region.