Texas Discussion Thread

[flight50]

This is where I think I'm miss understood. Its not just new companies I speak of. Its diversity which would bring new companies. What I mean is the link below. Use the link below and click on specialization to do alphabetical order. Look at how many companies are under each specialty. On average there are at least 5 companies.
here:https://truck-simulator.fandom.com/wiki ... _Companies

Now look at the ATS companies list below and go to specialization and alphabetize it. For the most part, there is only one company per specialty.
https://truck-simulator.fandom.com/wiki ... _Companies

This is the argument and the lack of diversity that most people don't seem to understand. Its not culture, it has nothing to do with culture. It the lack of diversity. For every company in ATS, there should at least be one competitor or alternate. ETS2 does it right. There are 5 under each specialty. ATS could at least have 2-3. Ports and airports are individual so they don't really count.

I seriously hope Texas is the start of something new to fix this issue. The lack of company diversity is going to only get worse. If Texas is a $17.99 dlc, it shouldn't be a repeat company list that we currently have. There are many people that may want to feel new and not copy pasted feeling companies. Texas has to pretty much wipe the board and make at least 70% new companies from scratch companies with the new South region coming. Some of the same prefabs is cool to copy and rebrand just like NAMIQ. Otherwise, all new please. Heck, import some of the prefabs from ETS2. They have awesome prefabs. Rebrand and modify to fit ATS. ETS2 depots are more innovative imho. ATS lacks in this department. They are sometimes to small for the size of truck combinations we have and that is tedious with conventional trucks.

[oldmanclippy]

The worst condemnation I can give the situation of companies in ATS: Iberia has 41 companies alone across two countries, 22 of which are new to Iberia. ATS has 49, 29 of which were added after the base map. Only 15 of those were added after Oregon. Of those 15, only 11 of them have a chance at reappearing. All of Iberia's have a chance of reappearing.

So to recap, we got double the amount of new, reusable companies in just Iberia than we did in Washington, Utah, Idaho, Colorado, and Wyoming combined. Even when counting reusable ones, Iberia still got 7 more. Oregon got 10 new companies itself (8 of which are reusable).

In summary, ATS currently has 40 reusable companies, 11 of which were added in the past five states combined. ETS2 can't really use the same metric: a lot of companies are country specific, but many (example: Dom Depot) can be reused by making branches/subsidiaries in other countries. So ETS2 has a lot of flexibility. It can reuse as many companies as it needs to through branches/subsidiaries, but it can accommodate lots of new companies in a new country as well. So admittedly it doesn't need a ton of reusable companies to support it, whereas ATS does. As I stated previously, Road to the Black Sea reused 15 companies, and Iberia 22.

But considering Washington reused 20, Utah 19, Idaho 23/23, Colorado 21, and Wyoming 24, ATS desperately needs a pool larger than 40 to work with if every state is gonna reuse half or more of them. Iberia reusing 22 is OK because there's over a hundred to choose from. Wyoming reusing 24 is not OK because that means there's only 16 non-one-off companies in the game that *aren't* in Wyoming. That's absolutely bonkers. We can't expect ATS to replicate ratios of companies to real life perfectly, but asking us to accept that 89% of companies in Wyoming exist in every state west and south of it is just too much.

A good goal should be to borrow 67% and create 33% of companies in a state. For Wyoming, that would have meant 9 new and 18 borrowed. I don't think that's an unreasonable ask: Wyoming is 67% of the price of Iberia, so expecting just over 40% of the number of new companies is fair. Wyoming is also about 40% the content of Iberia, so 40% of the company count adds up. Heck even 30% would be an improvement. We're sitting at about 14% of Iberia's company count with Wyoming and Colorado. That's unacceptable IMO.

I rag on ATS's ICC problem (and I suspect flight50 has this reasoning too) not because I am just looking for things to complain about, but because SCS has set such high expectations with ETS2 in terms of number of new companies in a DLC that I know they can do better because they have done better. It's the same reason I harp on ETS2 for its relative lack of well made environments. Because ATS has shown that they have the internal capabilities to do better. The ATS teams can learn a lot from the ETS2 teams and vice versa. ATS needs to take the ICC diversity from ETS2. ETS2 needs to take the environmental modeling prowess from ATS. ATS needs to take some density from ETS2. ETS2 needs to take better attention to detail from ATS. The list goes on. Both games have their strong points and their weak points. The goal should be for each game to converge on the other's strong points over time. It's not like they're trying to keep up with a competitor, they're trying to keep up with themselves. If SCS has one biggest weakness that I had to choose, it'd be that they don't seem like they share enough knowledge and insight across the ETS2 and ATS mapping and asset teams. They need to make it a priority for the ETS2 team to learn from what the ATS team is doing right, and for the ATS team to learn from what the ETS2 team is doing right. That is the fastest way to improve these games IMO.

[Marcello Julio]

That's what I've been saying for some time. There are some types of companies that they need to add to ATS. For example, is missing IKA Bohag on ATS. We have IKEA in real life in both Europe and the United States, and this type of company is lacking on ATS. Bringing IKA Bohag to ATS now with Texas would be a perfect time. They brought in Vitas Power which is based on Vestas and which operates on both continents, so it's not hard.

[Brendan0620]

I've also been saying the same thing for a while too. More companies with ATS is extremely vital for the future of the game. Texas should bring no less than 10 companies with the DLC. Ika Bohag, like Marcello is saying, would be nice to see in ATS, and I strongly agree. I counted and currently there are 49 companies in ATS, which may sound like a lot to some people, but comparing that to the 190 or so companies in ETS2, it's kind of an underwhelming number for ATS.

It would be very cool to see a depot for current fast food companies (Dream Burger, Taco Kingdom, etc.) in ATS, of course there would have to be drop off locations added and I am sure some people have talked about that here on the forum but who knows if we will ever see that come, would be very nice to see in the future. I have also said the same thing about Gas Stations because oil and gas will be a massive industry when Texas comes.

I get that it might be a bit harder to add new companies to ATS due to having to redo some parts of the current map, but it shouldn't be too hard.

Oil and Glass coming with Texas is a step in the right direction. It can bring the company count higher and even bring Glasson finally into American Truck Simulator. It's going to be interesting to see what Texas brings to the table.

[AlexxxF1]

A good goal should be to borrow 67% and create 33% of companies in a state. For Wyoming, that would have meant 9 new and 18 borrowed. I don't think that's an unreasonable ask: Wyoming is 67% of the price of Iberia, so expecting just over 40% of the number of new companies is fair. Wyoming is also about 40% the content of Iberia, so 40% of the company count adds up. Heck even 30% would be an improvement. We're sitting at about 14% of Iberia's company count with Wyoming and Colorado. That's unacceptable IMO.

for some reason you all times are try comparing the area of ​​countries and states.
although companies are working people. and it is necessary to compare the population first of all.
57.22 million population Iberia.
0.58 million population Wyoming (only 1.01% population Iberia). surely Iberia must therefore come with a large number of companies.

for example, therefore, 10-100 people who work in one company, this is a still very small company.
in my opinion to be shown on a scale of 1:20 are worthy of the largest and most important. mass companies. everything else is rubbish in 1:20 scale.

in all USA 328,2 million population. Wyoming only 0.18% of this. so bringing a bunch of new companies with Wyoming would be a very bad idea for me.

[flight50]

10 new companies for Texas is still depressing. If Oregon brought 10-11 and Texas is 2-2.5 times larger with a massive economy.....10 just won't cut it either. I'd be satisfied with 15 or more. Every new region for ETS2 gets 15+ new companies. If Texas is as large as any ETS2 map and if Texas starts a new region I don't see why Texas can't jump start new companies. I'm really starting to tire of the repetitive companies with every dlc in the West. With every new dlc, I cross my fingers for new companies coming on to replace some of the repeats in older areas of the map. In some cities, there are 2 of the same companies in a city. This should never happen. It doesn't happen in ETS2 so why is it happening in ATS? Store...Warehouse...I get it. But ATS is about OTR, not local delivery. If a Walmart Warehouse/Distribution Center is one town, don't put a Walmart supercenter there too. Make it for the next town. There should be (1) distribution center per every 5 or so supercenters. In a nutshell, I think ATS lacks more companies because repeating companies easier. Easy isn't always good. Hard work does pay off though. So the corner cutting should be minimized. I'm not buying ATS is hard to implement new companies when ATS can be treated like regions just like ETS2. Bring in new companies to replace some of the old over used base map companies. Deepgrove....where is Lumber Jill? Too many companies are missing to breathe more life into ATS. I hate to say it, but since Oregon released, new companies have gone pretty stale for ATS. It almost like...here are 3 companies...be fine with that.

I don't know who is calling the shots with new company selections or how many new companies make each dlc, but its not the right way to push forward with ATS. I don't know if its Pavel or if it was Andrej back in the day when he was over ATS. But we need someone to take charge of making the ATS economy the focal point of the game. That's the purpose of the game....at least I though. If the main purpose of the game is to transport cargo from point A to B, we need diversity. New industries or not, we need more companies hitting the game for existing industries. New industries will arrive as more dlc's arrive. If they can fix the base map, if they can fix the sound, if they can fix the lighting, if they can upgrade to DX11/DX12.....why can't they fix the economy. Everything takes time and resources. Dedicate some time to make the ATS economy something to brag about. Its the main purpose of the game. No cargo.....no delivery to (x) companies. Lack on industries=lack of cargo. ICCs need each other. All three play off one another. Increase ICCs and the economy will be much better.

I don't think you can compare the number of people to how many companies there are. If there is just one person, that is still 1 company needing to exist. We can have 10 (1) person companies, or we can have 10 (500) people companies. The number of employees only dictates the size of the company, not the existence of one. One person dictates whether you have a company or not though. Outside of just being easier, there is no reason to use so many old companies in every dlc with the improvements SCS has made. The reuse is over done and needs to be thinned out. Newer prefabs for old company is not the same as a new company. The variations of building per company is nice. Now ATS does have this advantage, but we still get the same old company name as before.

[AlexxxF1]

just in case I am not against new companies.
it's just very important for me that everything is in harmony and combination on a scale of 1:20. and does not break out abruptly, destroys the immersion.
distances, the passage of time, the population - all these are the most important and basic things that need to be considered first of all if we have a
scale 1:20.

[killingjoke28336]

I don't care that much about companies. I sit in my cockpit view and enjoy the landscape while listening to some music, that's about it. The more roads the better.

[oldmanclippy]

for some reason you all times are try comparing the area of ​​countries and states.
although companies are working people. and it is necessary to compare the population first of all.
57.22 million population Iberia.
0.58 million population Wyoming (only 1.01% population Iberia). surely Iberia must therefore come with a large number of companies.

for example, therefore, 10-100 people who work in one company, this is a still very small company.
in my opinion to be shown on a scale of 1:20 are worthy of the largest and most important. mass companies. everything else is rubbish in 1:20 scale.

in all USA 328,2 million population. Wyoming only 0.18% of this. so bringing a bunch of new companies with Wyoming would be a very bad idea for me.

The number of companies has nothing to do with the population at all. The population dictates the size of cities as it does in real life. Because not all companies in a state are there to cater to the people in that state. Wyoming has rail, cattle, minerals, oil, all these things are exported to other states with larger populations. Population has nothing to do with it.

The number of new companies in particular has even less to do with population. It has everything to do with keeping the game fresh. Those new companies can come in older states as reskins as well. Introduce a Wallbert competitor and reskin some of the Wallberts in previous DLCs. They already did it once with NAMIQ and Coastline Mining. Wyoming getting more new companies than previous DLCs would not hurt immersion at all if those companies are backported to previous DLCs. Texas getting more new companies than previous DLCs needs no further justification because Texas is a completely different part of the country than the west. In real life, the difference in companies is extreme. Texas might as well be a different country than Washington.

[flight50]

There are a few sayings with Texas
1) its like a whole other country. Meaning behind it is because of its economy. Technically. Texas is setup in a way that it could be ran as its own government.
2) everything is bigger in Texas. Meaning there is that its so big, that anything fits and everything is big. There is lot of space to support a ton here.

So companies have nothing to do with population nor culture. Its about industries. How can companies benefit more than just the state its in. All 48 states are linked yes. Its one country here yes. But all states benefit from one another and the more industries,
the more companies. The more companies the better the diversity even in the same industry. The purpose for more companies keeps being misunderstood and ignored. Culture and population plays zero roles in what companies can and should be present. Product from the East coast may be necessary and only available from the West coast. What only happens in Texas may be needed in Oregon. Cross regional transport. Same regional transport. In state and continental transport. All need to transport to all 48 states when industries calls for it.

Industries drive companies. Industries drive cargo. More states drive industries. Industry is the economy in ATS. No industry, no point in the game. It might as will be a tourist game to just drive. The game is not about building churches or restaurants or architectural building elements. That is culture. Trucking is driving to transport goods and products from one company to another company to utilize to make a product or for the end user..the consumer. You get goods from companies. Those companies ship out and receive and that is what trucking is. Its the backbone in North America and the diversity is not there to feel that.

Texas is really a prove it dlc considering its the start of a brand new region. A new region should mean new environment, new industries, new natural resources.....each region can specialize in something that another didn't provide. If Texas doesn't change the way SCS structures ATS, I don't see any change ever coming to ATS and that would be quite sad and depressing. That means they waited to long/late and the economy of ATS got out of hand. That, or they don't care to make the economy the focus of the game. People that wanted more trucks, better graphics and sounds won over while the core purpose of the game takes a back set. Unfortunately, we are a year away from knowing all this.