Wyoming Discussion Thread

User avatar
Jatruck
Posts: 808
Joined: 01 Dec 2019 10:41

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5671 Post by Jatruck » 21 Sep 2021 15:20

The one who follows it, then get it. Or ... El que la sigue la consigue ... :lol:

BTW, a picture is worth a thousand words: :D ;)

[ external image ]
Last edited by Jatruck on 21 Sep 2021 15:26, edited 1 time in total.
Trucker Nik
Posts: 2146
Joined: 27 Feb 2021 10:29
Location: Trenčín, Slovensko

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5672 Post by Trucker Nik » 21 Sep 2021 15:25

I don't do it twice a day
User avatar
Jatruck
Posts: 808
Joined: 01 Dec 2019 10:41

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5673 Post by Jatruck » 21 Sep 2021 15:33

Maybe twice a week? ... :lol: :lol: :lol: ;) ;) ;)
User avatar
plykkegaard
Posts: 7206
Joined: 26 Oct 2014 13:42

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5674 Post by plykkegaard » 21 Sep 2021 17:16

Ceco wrote: 21 Sep 2021 15:25 I don't do it twice a day
But you'd like to do it twice a day, thats what counts :D

This signature virus has been spliced with the Fundementalism-B virus to create a new more contagious strain. Please look for it infecting a signature near you.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30042
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5675 Post by flight50 » 21 Sep 2021 17:16

Ceco wrote: 21 Sep 2021 15:05 @Jatruck I'm glad I'm not alone with US-14 and Cody
@Trucker_71 It is possible that I have already mentioned it, I like to remind scs here on the forum to know what we want / what is needed
Nope, you definitely are not alone. I've screamed for it well before anyone was making a fuss about it. Well before blogs entered that 1-2 week zone. That and Yellowstone. Now you guys do it enough that I don't have too. It annoys some people to keep seeing the request but I can care less how often it appears. Wyoming does not deserve to fall down the same rabbit hole as Utah's Southern gap. Gaps are signs of too few people working a dlc imho. Some states are under estimated. If Pavel thinks 10 people are needed for (x) dlc...make it 11. If it takes 12 to do a dlc....make it 13. I think SCS is cutting it thin on what it takes. Some places and roads just need to be in place and when they are not, the masses will talk. If only 2-3 people was calling for this or that road, the devs probably won't bother. But when a decent amount from the communnity is calling for something, the story changes.
User avatar
AlexxxF1
Posts: 555
Joined: 20 Oct 2020 04:50
Location: Belarus
Contact:

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5676 Post by AlexxxF1 » 21 Sep 2021 20:17

gaps are signs of too few people working a dlc imho....I don't think so. gaps are signs of these roads are hardly used by large trucks in real life.
these roads are needed to sometimes leave the house for work for local residents, but not in mass interstate transportation cargoes exactly.

this is, for example, like the road US-85 in WY. from Gillette to Cheyenne, they don't use it, when there is an I-25 nearby.
all large and small carriers will use the I-25, as it is faster, saves a lot of time and fuel for large trucks.

yes, we could get US-85 as a bonus. but for me, it is much more important and first of all better to waste time over reworking the old states like CA NV and AZ.
and in the future, when they are finished with them, we can receive roads in all the past states as a bonus, in order to close any gaps.
Last edited by AlexxxF1 on 22 Sep 2021 00:20, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
saur44l
Posts: 961
Joined: 07 May 2016 22:16
Location: Macedonia

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5677 Post by saur44l » 21 Sep 2021 20:32

Well there are plenty of roads in ATS where no trucks should be allowed so including few more is not gonna change much,and no one is forcing anyone to take those roads,if someone thinks that one shouldn't drive there with a semi,then by all means avoid them,just like in real life. :mrgreen:
User avatar
AlexxxF1
Posts: 555
Joined: 20 Oct 2020 04:50
Location: Belarus
Contact:

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5678 Post by AlexxxF1 » 21 Sep 2021 20:51

@saur44l yep, we have a road in Arizona near Grand Canyon US-180, 64. and what, do you often drive on it? once a year. or even less often. and if the SCS spends time working out all possible roads for each state, we will receive this state once a year, once a year DLC release. and all USA we'll get
even without Canada and Mexico in 20 years. when Oregon Washington is settled and will need rework, if not the whole game, because in 20 years there will already be new standards in graphics and pictures.

not having huge resources and extra time, for me it is more important that the SCS does not waste time on secondary things, but concentrates on the most important things being released as quickly as possible. as 3-4 DLС releases per year for ATS and accelerated the rework of all old territories, as CA, NV, AZ.

when SCS will have free hands, then yes, it would be great to get any new roads as a bonus, to any past state.
like how we got the whole Sardinia for Italy DLC or the whole Corsica for Viva la France DLC.
Last edited by AlexxxF1 on 21 Sep 2021 21:08, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
saur44l
Posts: 961
Joined: 07 May 2016 22:16
Location: Macedonia

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5679 Post by saur44l » 21 Sep 2021 20:56

Yes but for me those things that you call secondary things are not waste of time,not everyone likes the same stuff and we are all paying customers,so.....we and SCS have to find some middle ground.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30042
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Wyoming Discussion Thread

#5680 Post by flight50 » 21 Sep 2021 21:06

AlexxxF1 wrote: 21 Sep 2021 20:17 gaps are signs of too few people working a dlc imho....I don't think so. gaps are signs of these roads are hardly used by large trucks in real life.
these roads are needed to sometimes leave the house for work for local residents, but not in mass interstate transportation cargoes exactly.

this is, for example, like the road US-85 in WY. from Gillette to Cheyenne, they don't use it, when there is an I-25 nearby.
all large and small carriers will use the I-25, as it is faster, saves a lot of time and fuel for large trucks.

yes, we could get US-85 as a bonus. but for me, it is much more important and first of all better to waste time over reworking the old states like CA NV and AZ.
and in the future, when they are finished with them, we can receive roads in all the past states as a bonus, in order to close any gaps.
Hardly used is possible for sure, but what is your reference to state this claim? Are you going by what you think? You have a Rand McNally to show truck routes? Do you use Truck route site or map to indicate truck traffic? Gillette to Cheyenne, they'd take WY-59 before US-85. That example doesn't say much. US-85 makes since for South Dakota and if New Castle would have come. It's also a shortcut to US-90. US-85 was not advocated specifically for Gillette to Cheyenne. Not to mention, not everyone like interstates. Many people enjoy back road travel in ATS.

Your idea on wasted time is no better than people wanting gaps filled. Its opinions at the end of the day. Your statement doesn't make you correct no more than people asking for more roads. There are things each person wants that another won't see as important to them. Its a two way street on a lot of things. But when the masses ask for something, the devs should consider it. Gaps in the map are not attractive and people will talk. Whether a truck frequents its travel or not, give the player that option to travel it.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 16 guests