Texas Discussion Thread

[flight50]

In brief ports are mentioned but nothing to elaborate. But yes I agree, ports along the Texas coast are important. There are several port cities along the Gulf for Texas. If we can get 3-4 cities with ports, that works. Houston/Galveston by far would be the tightest fit. The others, there is a bit more space. It seems as though the Texas ports can be a bit different than the current prefabs we have. I hope SCS doesn't recycle the ports from the West coast. Its a new region, new vibe. Make the ports from scratch. At least the Houston ports. I also think the cargo should be different or at least not all the exact same. The Gulf ports should introduce cargo from a totally different geographical region such as South America, Africa and Europe. While the West coast ports should be more or less Asia and Australia.

[oldmanclippy]

I am sure $17.99 will be the price. Any more will rub people who buy ETS2 DLC's the wrong way, any less is throwing money down the drain. Texas will be bigger than any ETS2 DLC maybe including Iberia. It should be priced as such. I would feel like I'd be robbing them for Texas at $11.99. I'll still feel that way at $17.99, but that's the reality they set up for themselves when they priced ETS2 DLC's.

I do things similarly to @flight50 but I don't always pick the capital. With Utah I was in Salt Lake, with Idaho I was in Twin Falls, and with Colorado I was in Lamar but I switched to Denver after stopping for a layover there a few weeks ago, felt like I gained a personal connection to it lol. I'm planning on Jackson for Wyoming (hoping it has a garage!) but if I come across a city I really like then I'll move there instead. Texas, I'm thinking Houston since that's the only place in Texas I've been IRL.

[Vinnie Terranova]

A quick comparison between Texas and Iberia:

Texas:
Area: 268,596 sq mi
Cities (to be expected): 20-30(?)

Iberia:
Area: 225,196 sq mi
Cities: 49

So, Texas is slightly bigger than Iberia, but not too much.

It is likely that Iberia has more cities than Texas will have. So, what about the size of the cities? It is true that some cities in Texas are really big. But how will those cities be depicted in the Texas DLC? I mean, look at Los Angeles metropole: irl it is really big, but in ATS it's not that big... Besides that, I think that you cannot really compare American cities with European cities.
The main differences are that most big cities in the US have quite an amount of skyscrapers, but apart from that does the urban/metropole area mainly consists of single houses. In Europe the big cities also have some skyscrapers, but less than the cities in the US have. And the urban/metropole area consists more of apartment buildings and terraced houses.
And last but not least there are the industrial and office areas. I think they are about the same in the US and Europe.

Iberia has a much denser road network. But again: that's irl. In ETS2 it is not very dense, and most roads are highways with very few country roads. So maybe the road network in ATS Texas will be about the same density as the road network in ETS2 Iberia.
Also I think that the intersections in both Texas and Iberia will be / are of the same level.

So in the end: apart from the obvious skyscrapers (and ofcourse the landscape) I'm curious how different the Texas DLC will be in comparison with the Iberia DLC. Maybe not too different at all?

[flight50]

Agreed. I think charging more for Texas than ETS2 dlc would seriously hurt ATS. ETS2 maps are huge and packed with content. Yes Texas just might be larger than any current ETS2 map but ATS also has all paid dlc's at $11.99. Many complan that Idaho an Utah are not worth it. So the extra $1-2 bucks there goes to Texas vs changing $18.99-19.99 for Texas. Everything works out. Like I mentioned.....SCS can sale more Texas dlc's by charging less. But not $11.99 less. That's rape and shouldn't even be in anyone's head. We need more people to buy and support ATS and more than $17.99 will run people away. That is the max price any SCS dlc should be imo. Make smaller maps before you have to go beyond $17.99. Fortunately for ATS, Texas is as large as a single state would ever get in regards to size and content. Alaska might be the largest state by area but by no means will it ever come close to the amount of content in Texas. If you want more ETS2 players to by Texas and more newcomers in general, it can't be more than the highest paid dlc now and those beyond to ETS2. People already complain that ATS will be more expensive in the long run. Maybe, maybe not. But I will never look at the overall cost for ATS when the maps are released 1-2 a year. That is a ridiculous excuse. $24 bucks a year....come on. One meal for a family for one day cost that. Multiple that time 365 days and see how you like that number. ATS least ATS dlc's are a life time and with free updates. That food you buy daily......it won't last a life time like a dlc would, and that is a promise, lol. There will be bundled states one day eventually I'm sure. There is more manpower now so SCS won't always have to stick with individual state releases. That's why I'm anxious to see how things work out beyond Texas.

If Texas can come jammed packed in what it will bring to the table, I think more people will be interested in dlc's East of I-25 a bit more easily. The road density should be there. At least I hope. The cities should decrease by a few but that's just simply because states get smaller. Sense of distance is something I always mention time and time again and that helps keep cities from piling up on top of one another in ATS. We can't have tons of cities like Nampa/Boise, CDA/Spokane or Portland/Vancouver. That works in select areas but things need to spread out the further East we go. SCS will have to plan 2 steps ahead for every dlc they do. Prime example is Lake Charles Louisiana. Its super close to Orange, Tx. Orange is between Lake Charles and Beaumont. If Lake Charles is to be marked, no Orange or a very very small scenic area. Imho, skip Orange and only represent it with the Orange Travel center on the border of Texas and Louisiana. That gives space for Beaumont. Best case, Orange gets exit 873 to get the trucks stops only and then exit 880 (the highest exit total). Exist 880 is perhaps the more crucial that people will expect to see. A ton of this type of planning will have to exist in the Midwest and the East in thinking about the last city for the w.i.p. dlc and the one that will follow it soon after. As things get tighter, so will SCS. Unless they have a better plan for the East with scale, there will be a lot of compromises and not everyone will be happy. Unfortunately, there could be some that simply stop playing due to scale. We are a ways off from seeing its effects in the game but the devs should have it on their radar now. We'll just have to see what their plan of attack is.

[clifflandmark]

I'd rather not to drive with people who don't want to pay 18 usd to a map as Tx size.

If someone has the priority for euro or us map, that's just a choice. for instance ;

I've got both games, but have been played ets max 50 hours. (It's 6 hours in steam page but I've been played pirate version until I bought) Although I did not buy Iberia yet, I'll buy WY and TX in release date.

so, it's all about preference. I don't think someone who loves trucking in US will complain about price.

Until someone make a wandering or truck simulator, these people ready to pay SCS.

[SmokeyWolf]

With Texas coming we need a new cargo. Bananas as they are shipped from Galveston and other Gulf Coast ports that come from South America.

[flight50]

Bananas would indeed be a great cargo to have. I'd hope for a lot more than just bananas though. Ports in general should have tons more cargo coming in and out. Between all the West coast ports and now the Gulf ports coming into play, we'll definitely need to see new cargo. As I always mention, each new dlc needs to bring new cargo no matter what. Whether it is 2-3 or 4-5, we'll need it to keep the game refreshed with each and every dlc. Def file cargoes are the easiest to do. Find out what each state does mostly, compare it with other states and decide what to bring with the w.i.p dlc. This again boils down to planning ahead. ICC's requires the devs to jump the gun and find out what's ahead.

It makes bringing new things much much easier because going backwards to implement can be a royal pain. Each new dlc should get a minor economy make over to incorporate all the new. But once you make massive changes to older dlc's, its gets more complicated. Now its harder to go back and add, lets say Kroger grocery store that is all over the place. If more national chains are cover as soon as possible, its makes the path ahead much easier. But not implementing.......for example Kroger means one of two things. 1) We'll never get it or 2) its going to be hell on wheels for the devs to go back and add it in every place can add. Too many Walmarts though. A lot of this stuff can get swapped out to Target wherever both retailers are. Same with other repetitive places around the ATS map. Thinning this stuff out make less receptiveness happen. Texas is perfect for adding a Texas based grocery store. But Texas can also be home to the national Kroger or Albertson's brand. I'd love to see a part 2 of Texa prefabs though. What we got so far I'm sure is not enough to paint the picture to what new is coming to Texas. Texas need some of that wow factor. Going by just the size of the dlc may not be enough for many to justify $17.99 if that's is indeed the price tag.

[Kirmes-Truck]

@ flight50

The topic "Ports" needs to be hyped up.

I hope that SCS will improve and add much more Ship AI.
The Ship AI was really disapointing in Iberia DLC, especialy in Algeciras.

In Galveston you also have many Tankers and Supertankers.

[flight50]

I'm not sure how much they can do with ships do to scale. But it would be cool to see some docked and some working the waters. Both cruise and working ships. There is a ton of water in the Gulf though. Perhaps they can give us something. The one think I really look forward to in the Gulf of Mexico is oil rigs and plenty of them. Not just in Texas though but they are stretched all across all the way over to Mobile Alabama. Shallow water and deep water would be nice. Don't over do it but enough to say heyyyy, we are here and a big industry in the Gulf.

The one thing I'd love to see with ports though is multiple ports terminals. I know scale is a huge issue but use the water. Push out into the ocean to add space if or when possible. These ports are massive...make them feel massive. At least bring 2-3 terminals or piers as they call them. So far, we only get one pier. But if sized right, perhaps 2-3 can be lined up like the below pic. This is Mobile, Alabama.

[ external image ]

[_Roger_]

Texas:
Area: 268,596 sq mi
Cities (to be expected): 20-30(?)

Washington:
Area: 71,362 sq mi
Cities: 16

I would certainly hope Texas is more than 30.