Montana Discussion Thread

User avatar
Xaagon
Posts: 990
Joined: 07 May 2016 02:35
Location: Colorado Springs, CO, USA

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#161 Post by Xaagon » 16 May 2021 04:13

I know Montana has been discussed quite a bit recently in the Wyoming thread, so I kind of wanted to pull this thread back to page one.

Wyoming is likely going to release this summer, then there will be lots of hype for Texas and the base map rebuild. Assuming the Wyoming team moves to Montana next, do you think they will announce Montana is under development before the end of 2021, maybe on the Christmas livestream?

I'm thinking we will get either Montana or Oklahoma, maybe both, before the end of 2022. If Texas pushes into 2022 that might be our first three state year. Am I too optimistic?
Tristman
Posts: 1543
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#162 Post by Tristman » 16 May 2021 07:39

I personally believe that if Texas pushes to early 2022, we will get Montana in fall/winter 2022. I’ve seen arguments about Montana being finished earlier due to the separate teams working on them, but from a marketing perspective it doesn’t make sense to me that they would release Montana so soon after Texas. I mean, why release a new DLC when people are still discovering what is probably their biggest DLC to date?
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30156
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#163 Post by flight50 » 16 May 2021 14:12

If Texas releases Spring or Summer of 2022, by no means should they hold Montana just because Texas is large. That is the benefits of having multiple map teams. Why cripple the game. If you have the manpower to produce Texas then Montana, by all means do so.

What makes no sense is forcing people to go even longer with no aid to Idaho. Marketing has no bearance here. Its being logical. Idaho needs help like yesterday. The Montana I-90 gap is much much larger than the I-84 gap we had before Idaho filled that gap. Same situation here. But times two. The missing I-90 gap is more than doubled the I-84 gap.

@Xaagon no, you are not being over optimistic. I've mentioned that possibility as well as of late. The key is Texas. When does it release. There is 2 teams working Texas more than likely. Pavel wanted 20+ mappers on it. When Texas releases, they split and they have several options with the freed up manpower:
1) one team to Oklahoma
2) one team to Louisiana
3) send help to the Wyoming team that should be going to Montana after Wyoming releases.

Two of those 3 options will take place. Which 2 is the question. If the Wyoming team goes to Oklahoma instead and the Texas team goes to Montana, that's more torture for Idaho, but nothing we can do. I am anticipateing Montana gets announced on this year's Xmas stream. It will be disappointing to not go that route. I'm 90% positive, Montana gets announced. 10% Oklahoma gets announced.

We should definitely be back to 2 maps a year next year though. I've been thinking 3 maps is possible for 2022 myself. But Texas is the key. Texas would have to release April or May. Montana would have to be Summer. June/July. But to give a tad more time July/August maybe even early September. First time since 2019 we get could away from June/July. Then Oklahoma for Winter Nov/Dec.

I think HoR is too large to release in 2022 because the amount of work is massive. It could go to 2023 as Oklahoma could be the only end of year map. Yes, ETS2 misses another year. But people never consider the size of ETS2 maps and just want what they want. If you miss a year, its not the end of the world. Look at how huge of a map is already in place vs complaining ATS got 2 or even 3 maps. Its not like the dlc is scrapped. Huge maps just take a huge amount of time. It is what it is.
Tristman
Posts: 1543
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#164 Post by Tristman » 16 May 2021 19:07

flight50 wrote: 16 May 2021 14:12 What makes no sense is forcing people to go even longer with no aid to Idaho. Marketing has no bearance here. Its being logical. Idaho needs help like yesterday. The Montana I-90 gap is much much larger than the I-84 gap we had before Idaho filled that gap. Same situation here. But times two. The missing I-90 gap is more than doubled the I-84 gap.
Well what I mean with marketing here, is the hype building for each DLC. If people are pumped to get access to the new DLC, they will buy it.
Now judging by the people on the forum, everyone really wants Montana for the sake of road connections, but I'm not sure if that is representative of the larger ATS playerbase.
Maybe a lot of players don't really know anything about Montana, or are only really focused on the next DLC that SCS is promoting on their blog and instagram.

If Texas releases somewhere in Spring, it's going to be a big thing. People will have waited a long time for it to come, and it's likely going to be the biggest DLC so far. It will take plenty of time to fully explore, even for the diehard fans on these forums. If they release Texas and would have Montana done within 3 months and release it, SCS will not have had enough time to build up the hype for it. They are also working on ETS2 at the same time, so they also want to work on building hype for the next DLC for that game.

What I'm saying is, if Montana releases too quickly after Texas, it will be overshadowed by Texas. That would probably hurt sales, and therefore doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

-----

That said, the argument above is from a logical point of view. As an ATS fan, I would love nothing more than for Montana to release as soon as possible.
fra_ba
Posts: 860
Joined: 17 Feb 2018 09:37

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#165 Post by fra_ba » 05 Jul 2021 09:43

Not sure if anybody mentioned this before in other threads or not, but I noticed that names of below Montana cities are sort of hidden in editor background map in open beta 1.41, maybe this is SCS future plan, mentioned in the corner of map image :D:
Missoula, Kalispell, Butte, Helena, Great Falls, Bozeman, Havre, Lewistown, Billings, Miles City, Glendive, Sidney and Glasgow
Last edited by fra_ba on 05 Jul 2021 14:08, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
harishw8r
Posts: 4100
Joined: 14 Mar 2020 05:52
Location: Moon
Contact:

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#166 Post by harishw8r » 05 Jul 2021 12:48

Had a doubt related to Montana, how relevant is the Beartooth Highway (US-212) to trucking?
Skoot
Posts: 851
Joined: 03 Mar 2020 16:33
Location: yes
Contact:

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#167 Post by Skoot » 05 Jul 2021 12:59

fra_ba wrote: 05 Jul 2021 09:43 Not sure if anybody mentioned this before in other threads or not, but I noticed that names of below Montana cities are sort of hidden in editor background map in open beta 1.41, maybe this is SCS future plan, mentioned in the corner of map image :D:
Yep, it seems that SCS removes the names of the cities/towns that are gonna be included in the DLC from that map and replaces them with city dots.
Shiva
Posts: 4967
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#168 Post by Shiva » 05 Jul 2021 13:29

I hadn't thought of of those names missing, Skoot and fra_ba.
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: 30156
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#169 Post by flight50 » 05 Jul 2021 14:09

@fra_ba Nice find. Montana is definitely West heavy. You mentioned Missoula twice though. W. YS should be scenic. Not much going on there anyways to do much with. As long as we can get from Idaho Falls via US-20, I'm good. I'd like to see something further East on US-2 though. Glasgow hopefully isn't the end. I'm hoping Wolf's Point or Culberson as a very small 2-3 depot type town. The Tonopah type town. So WY-13 or WY-16 to I-94. Glendive and Miles is definitely a yes. I wonder why Shelby isn't a marked town. Its right off I-15 and has some contributions to the dlc. Montana is a very wide open state and once you get East of I-15, all that is apparent. There should be tons of scenic towns though. Maybe we get lots of remote stuff from the marked cities. But this will probably be one of the more open spread out marked cities dlc's we'll get. Should be fun.

@harishw8r Honestly, the only part of US-212 that I think makes the game is East of I-90. Into YS is a far push. It seems like limited space perhaps. I'd like to see US-310 though.

So this does at least confirm preliminary is in the works if its in the game files. Honestly, I'd be 1000% shocked if Montana is not announced on the 2021 Xmas stream. Idaho can use some help finally. Wyoming twice the gap with I-90 than the gap we had with I-84 between Utah and Oregon. Once Wyoming releases, we'll get by without Montana but its such a huge missing piece once Wyoming drops.

Key pluses for Montana
- that much more of I-90, US-2 and US-12 filled in
- a completed I-15, US-93, US-191, US-287
- the start of I-94
- completed Western region of the US. 1/3 of the US completed
- tons of open space as its the 3rd largest state in the lower 48
fra_ba
Posts: 860
Joined: 17 Feb 2018 09:37

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#170 Post by fra_ba » 05 Jul 2021 14:22

Yeah I just edited the list, forgot to mention the big one! on east the 13 you mentioned would work as the most eastern road between Sidney and Culbertson. Sidney has a sugar factory so we could see sugar with Montana maybe?
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Crysta1ake, dkasper00, DracoTorre, oldmanclippy, ShadowScorpion_9, tbwhhs, Trenero and 16 guests