Wyoming Discussion Thread

User avatar
Trucker_71
Posts: 3416
Joined: 09 Apr 2018 07:35
Location: Abbotsford BC Canada

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5771 Post by Trucker_71 » 28 Sep 2021 17:48

This thread has taken speculation & hype to a new level. The hype train is a runaway on an already released DLC! lol
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30357
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5772 Post by flight50 » 28 Sep 2021 18:05

Lol. Thats the way we roll, lol. The hype is how to attach the adjacent state(s) to the currently released. Going to the border to see what we could get for connections is interesting. We are heading East no matter what. So each state added, pretty much shares 2-3 borders with another state. That is the one upside ATS has with land locked states.

We are off topic a tad but better than continuing dragging out Cody and US-14. There are other postives that can be made until we get what's requested the most for Wyoming. Wyoming can be great with those adds. What's better than a great Wyoming? Linking another great state to it. Group a lot of great dlc's together and you get a great game. So no matter where you go, everything is great. Wyoming could be the new standard for all I know. Nut each dlc to come can have that title. Montana could easily top it. Same with Texas. Depends on what floats your boat.
Shiva
Posts: 4994
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5773 Post by Shiva » 28 Sep 2021 18:15

Moorcroft, that is ingame around Sundance area.
So I think WY-450 to either US-16 going to SD, or US-85 possible.

Crazy Horse, that seem to be a bit controversial?
And I am not sure there is space for both it and Mt Rushmore, but maybe SCS can do wonders?

US-85, Lusk WY to Newcastle WY, that could be a possibility. In the future.
Maybe even from Lingle? But that takes away the space from Torrington, I think.
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
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5550
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5774 Post by oldmanclippy » 28 Sep 2021 21:40

@Shiva Crazy Horse isn't the controversial one, the controversial one is Mount Rushmore. But it's not widely controversial. Definitely not controversial enough to be on SCS's radar in terms of things to not map. It's part of South Dakota's landscape, like it or not. And it's very famous, so according to SCS's penchant for mapping landmarks it should make it in. Crazy Horse is more impressive IMO even in its unfinished state. Maybe my grandchildren will be able to see it completed. It should also make it in if they have room for it. It's an important landmark in the area just like Mount Rushmore, plus it is more easily accessed via truck so it's all about making room for the hills/mountains in between them. I think they can pull it off if they exaggerate the area that the Black Hills occupy on the world map.
headquartered in Denver [ external image ] and Brussels [ external image ]
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | German Cities
prediction maps: Greece+Nordic Horizons | Nebraska+Arkansas+Missouri
User avatar
PBandJ
Posts: 1277
Joined: 16 Jul 2019 22:54
Location: My computer chair...:)

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5775 Post by PBandJ » 28 Sep 2021 21:48

As always, two sides to every conversation. If Mount Rushmore is excluded there is absolutely no way Crazy Horse should be in. 4 US Presidents should not be overlooked for one person.
Tristman
Posts: 1570
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5776 Post by Tristman » 28 Sep 2021 21:54

I personally expect Mt. Rushmore to be included in a similar way to Devils Rock. Just a long spur from a more important road that ends at the viewpoint.
That said, Devils Rock got a farm as a bonus. I don’t think that is necessary for Rushmore, but why not I guess.
User avatar
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5550
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5777 Post by oldmanclippy » 28 Sep 2021 22:05

@PBandJ Crazy Horse actually has a reason to go there for a truck; look at the link I posted earlier and you can see a truck and construction equipment there since it's an active construction site. Mt. Rushmore may or may not be serviced by trucks vs sprinter vans. I don't know enough to tell you, I would need to do more research on it. Plus Crazy Horse is more easily accessible. It's not about two sides to every story, it's about which one makes more sense. Mt Rushmore makes more sense from a tourism perspective since it's more well-known, Crazy Horse makes more sense from a trucking perspective (as far as I know). Both might make it in; if one makes it in it will probably be Mt Rushmore since it's more well-known.
Last edited by oldmanclippy on 28 Sep 2021 22:20, edited 1 time in total.
headquartered in Denver [ external image ] and Brussels [ external image ]
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | German Cities
prediction maps: Greece+Nordic Horizons | Nebraska+Arkansas+Missouri
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30357
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5778 Post by flight50 » 28 Sep 2021 22:19

SD-244 could fit if SCS goes Reforma style on it. If no US-85, even easier. US-385 would be in and SCS can push Crazy Horse West. That leaves enough space to squeeze in SD-244 and make it more like "the Million Dollar Hwy". SD-244 is not a national park so that controversy isn't there. That road is a beauty though for SCS not to make. Not to mention the beauty of Rushmore. I may never see Rushmore in person in my lifetime so this would be the best I could get to seeing it.

If US-16 gets extended from Moorcroft prior to SD coming, that would be a good indication that US-16 gets us into the Black Hills. There is no point in making US-16 into SD unless Rushmore is coming. Now if US-18 comes instead, not only does US-85 have to be in place, but it could be an indication that the Black Hill will be avoided. That takes away a lot from SD. With all the trees, that can block a lot so performance should be too draining.

I posted a link back in Feb about Rushmore. viewtopic.php?p=1500168#p1500168. We don't have to access the site itself, we can actually just drive right by it and no truck has to ever enter the tourist part. There are a few views in which you can see it from the road and that is all we need.
Shiva
Posts: 4994
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5779 Post by Shiva » 28 Sep 2021 23:05

oldmanclippy wrote: 28 Sep 2021 21:40 @Shiva Crazy Horse isn't the controversial one, the controversial one is Mount Rushmore. But it's not widely controversial. Definitely not controversial enough to be on SCS's radar in terms of things to not map. It's part of South Dakota's landscape, like it or not. And it's very famous, so according to SCS's penchant for mapping landmarks it should make it in. Crazy Horse is more impressive IMO even in its unfinished state. Maybe my grandchildren will be able to see it completed. It should also make it in if they have room for it. It's an important landmark in the area just like Mount Rushmore, plus it is more easily accessed via truck so it's all about making room for the hills/mountains in between them. I think they can pull it off if they exaggerate the area that the Black Hills occupy on the world map.
Both seem to be controversial.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crazy_Hor ... troversies
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: 30357
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5780 Post by flight50 » 28 Sep 2021 23:16

I wouldn't call that controversy. That type of conflict is not political enough here in the US. Its not calling out a group of people to warrant a name change or draw special attention. Its a sculpture that all the public can see. The issue presented in that article was that people made millions off site visitation. SCS is not making money off putting a 3d model in there dlc. Its not the focus of SD that would draw in money like that.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Albedo, BunnyTasteGood, cp5106, disintegration7x, KennyPete, Mth_64000, sneg1784, ZeFrango and 36 guests