Louisiana Discussion Thread

User avatar
clifflandmark
Posts: 904
Joined: 13 Oct 2020 16:36
Location: Urfa
Contact:

Re: Louisiana Discussion Thread

#31 Post by clifflandmark » 12 Sep 2021 08:55

I think west part (with montana) is complete a boxed shape. Dont you think reaching to Atlantic is priority ?

It's time of boring flat plains of mid america.kansas, nebraska, oklahoma, arkansas...I want to think they are going to balance these boring flat plains with Atlantic aim.only Atlantic aim can make it more fun.

I'm also super excited to dream to drive in Great Lakes region but atlantic aim and great plains causes Great Lakes region to be delayed.
Tristman
Posts: 1536
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: Louisiana Discussion Thread

#32 Post by Tristman » 12 Sep 2021 11:13

I think like several people have proposed, they should do a stair-shaped map. That way we keep progressing towards Florida, but also keep the map in a shape that you are not stuck in a west-east corridor.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30042
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Louisiana Discussion Thread

#33 Post by flight50 » 12 Sep 2021 11:31

^Exactly. You kill two birds with one stone. If SCS stays in one region without diversity, I fear the support will drop off with day one sales. People will opt for more sales to get the dlc's cheaper. Only the most loyal of fans will buy whatever state SCS does. But SCS can't expect people to want to toss money to them by staying in one region. As the map grows pushing East, we now have two regions that split the US....the MidWest and the South. The Northeast is light years away so the focus should be bringing the MidWest and the South simultaneously. We should have 3 regions in ATS by 2024-2025. I see that as the time to seriously open up ATS. More ICC's galore. Holding back ICCs at that point will only cause more issues moving forward.

I'd like to see Texas surrounded first perhaps, then move to the MidWest with Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska....while bringing in Mississippi, Alabama into play. I don't think you can really call surrounding Texas corridor. Not with double stacked states. Louisiana offers something totally different than Oklahoma and Kansas. Bringing that biome forward will keep fans engaged and excited about maps. I don't see fans staying excited by only doing one region at a time. The West is totally different. Its all one huge lump sum of stacked states. The MidWest and the South split right across the middle of the US and both should come a piece at a time year year.

[ external image ]
killingjoke28336
Posts: 522
Joined: 02 Sep 2019 12:50

Re: Louisiana Discussion Thread

#34 Post by killingjoke28336 » 13 Sep 2021 12:07

Imagine SCS runs out of support and money for their games and must call it quits before they finish the US. That would be such a bummer.
Another thing that worries me is that the further you go East the more deciduous forests there are and the forests really don't look that good in ETS2 or ATS. I hope they can get a new technique in for those forests as right now they are far too thin.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30042
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Louisiana Discussion Thread

#35 Post by flight50 » 13 Sep 2021 17:00

If they run out of money for ATS, I'll just play another game or go back to my fish hobby. I stopped it in August 2016 a few months after I got ATS June 2016. I've devoted more time to ATS at that point.

The forest don't bother me in ATS. I'm cool with them. The problem is performance. They all will have tree walls in the backgrounds. They can't place 3d trees everywhere though without fps drops. A lot of trees are 2d trees made to look 3d based on your viewing angle. They might be able to touch up on it a tad bit but I wouldn't expect an open world 3D forest in SCS games.
User avatar
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5300
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Louisiana Discussion Thread

#36 Post by oldmanclippy » 13 Sep 2021 21:13

I agree with the Port Fourchon idea. It's an extremely important port, and while I think it's more important for shipping and pipelines than it is for trucking, it should still be included. Morgan City can be scenic, no need to make life harder on the New Orleans mapper(s).

For marked cities I want to see Shreveport, Monroe, Natchitoches, Alexandria, Lake Charles, Lafayette, Baton Rouge, New Orleans, and Port Fourchon. That's 9 marked cities which is just right for LA in my opinion. Tallulah can be scenic on the way to Vicksburg but I see that part of I-20 coming with Mississippi. US-165 between Alexandria and Monroe can be the eastern extent of the DLC in the northern part of the state, and US-171 can be the western border. There's not a whole lot of options for SCS in terms of which roads to bring for Louisiana. I think it will be one of the easier states to predict but I might be made to eat my hat because SCS always brings surprises.

It could look something like this on release:
[ external image ]

and this after the states around it are filled in:
[ external image ]

Depending on what eastern Texas looks like, LA-6/TX-21 aka the Texas Highway might not be used to connect them. It could be US-84, US-190, or even LA-8/TX-63. I like LA-6/TX-21 because it crosses the Toledo Bend Reservoir and it's roughly halfway between I-10 and I-20.

I think the New Orleans area will be a challenge. In my map, I have 6 big intersections that need to be separated from each other. If they absolutely need to they could cut the Lake Ponchartrain Causeway (the unmarked pink road by NO), but it's the longest continuous bridge over water in the world and it would be a shame if it was left out.

I think it's possible we get US-167 instead of 165 coming north out of Alexandria, but then there's not room for US-165 and 167 can't really be the eastern extent of northern Louisiana. I don't think US-65 is a good idea, because I'd rather get US-61 north-south through Mississippi (and beyond all the way to the Twin Cities ideally) as it connects Baton Rouge, Natchez, Vicksburg, Greenville, and Memphis. US-65 in Louisiana doesn't do much by comparison. SCS won't put both, so US-61 makes much more sense IMO.

I like LA-1 as an alternative route from Alexandria to Baton Rouge so that Lafayette doesn't become the next Winnemucca. Plus it's a much-needed look at rural life in central Louisiana.

I could see Louisiana being sold at $8.99 or $9.99 with an 8 month development. I think it will be hard for them to shove any more density into it than this without compromising the unique biome of LA. We need room to breathe. Yes, Louisiana has a dense road network IRL, but there's a lot of cool bridges and roads in between the bigger cities, that trying to squeeze in minor cities like Ruston, Leesville, Morgan City/Houma, or Slidell will compromise our ability to appreciate Louisiana's scenery. Slidell I see as a Buffalo situation: the existence of the major intersection there combined with its proximity to another major city is precluding it from being marked. I just think NO and all the roads across the water there need more room. Maybe SCS will prove me wrong but I think there are limitations even skill and creativity just can't overcome.
Last edited by oldmanclippy on 13 Sep 2021 21:27, edited 1 time in total.
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | see profile for link to Germany cities and Switzerland rework maps
prediction maps: Greece | ATS 2024-2025 DLCs
research map: Upper Midwest (work in progress)
User avatar
55sixxx
Posts: 3392
Joined: 02 May 2020 23:11
Location: 34° 4′ 35″ N, 118° 25′ 46.6″ W
Contact:

Re: Louisiana Discussion Thread

#37 Post by 55sixxx » 13 Sep 2021 21:24

Sometimes i wish the game had a 1:10 scale, it would make things a lot easier to design (But it would require a ton of work), people who like short jobs would do local drop offs and the LH fans would still go the long way.

And i can see 2023 being the first year with 3 states being released... It's not impossible and since their teams keep growing, i wouldn't have a doubt that it will happen.
User avatar
VTXcnME
Posts: 1220
Joined: 04 Jun 2021 12:53

Re: Louisiana Discussion Thread

#38 Post by VTXcnME » 13 Sep 2021 21:39

Reignman wrote: 08 Sep 2021 22:39
55sixxx wrote: 07 Sep 2021 17:12I've heard rumors of Pavel's wish to get to Florida as soon as possible
Oh man, fly over states can't get any love in the virtual world either? SCS just going to fly right over them here too huh? :lol:

Personally I wish they'd always try to keep the map as square as possible to avoid bottlenecks, so after Montana I'd like to see them hit Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, and then the Dakotas. Then Minnesota and working back south. Louisiana will quickly become a boring bottleneck if they just do the south east strip to Florida.

They could always throw us a curveball too and do Mexico after Texas, or even parts of Canada after Montana.
I wish for that too. Montana will square up the west nicely.

My off the cuff prediction was Texas/Montana/Oklahoma/Kansas/Louisiana/Nebraska/Arkansas/S Dakota/Mississippi/N Dakota etc.... continuing east via southeast and then up the eastern sea board with the teams working the Kansas/nebraska row to move east across the great lakes states, closing in all the gaps along the way. Then the two teams pushing toward the northeast from the ohio/west virginia/virginia area. I know... wild shot speculation right there!! I really hope they finish the US before expanding to Canada and Mexico

Who knows? SCS knows. And they'll never tell. :lol:

I'll just be happy to keep getting more DLC. I live in Maine, so driving in my home state is BEYOND a pipe dream at this point. Probably looking at 2030 before that's even on the "coming soon" list. :lol:
User avatar
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5300
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Louisiana Discussion Thread

#39 Post by oldmanclippy » 13 Sep 2021 21:52

@55sixxx Here's what we (all but) know: (lots of assumptions here so take it with a grain of salt)

Texas has two map teams working on it now, including presumably the Washington/Colorado team. When Texas is complete, it can break into two teams, one going to Oklahoma and the other going to Louisiana possibly.

The Wyoming team is almost surely in Montana already, if not they should be starting soon.

The question is: do the two teams that split off after Texas work on the same thing or different things? Maybe they'll distribute mappers to Montana or even California to help out there. Some will go to Oklahoma, others to the post Oklahoma state(s). We are assuming here that they are Louisiana and Arkansas, but we don't know for sure or have solid evidence for or against it.

The thing that kind of throws me off, is that it doesn't make a lot of sense for both the post-Texas teams to start on their projects right away if those projects are supposed to take the same amount of time (I assume Oklahoma will be a bit more work than Louisiana, which will be a similar work load to Arkansas), UNLESS they are planning to release them at the same time. I don't think we should discount the possibility of Oklahoma and Louisiana releasing very close to one another. If they are both 8-10 month maps which I think they are, then they would be done 8-10 months after Texas. If this is the case, it's possible that Louisiana leapfrogs Oklahoma by 2 months or so, with both of them being promoted for a close release window to compensate for Texas widening releases out. Then Arkansas comes from the Montana team later in 2023. So a conservative outlook could look like:

Texas - July 2022
Montana - November 2022 (14 months from Wyoming)
Louisiana - May 2023 (10 months from Texas)
Oklahoma - July 2023 (12 months from Texas)
Arkansas - November 2023 (12 months from Montana)

If Wyoming was a 10 month map for a team of 9.5 mappers, most of which were newbies led by a first-time map lead, then in reality I don't think Oklahoma would take 12 months for a team that just got lots of experience working on Texas. Even Louisiana might not take 10 months from a team fresh off Texas. Texas is surely a massive asset hurdle, but a lot of those assets can be useful for the states surrounding it. Plus tree walls will be prevalent especially in Louisiana which are easy to map. It all depends on how many new assets are needed, how dense the roads and cities are made, etc.

I think it's quite possible we'll be getting 3 maps in 2023, it's just whether or not that's Montana + Oklahoma + #3, or Oklahoma + #2 + #3. I think Montana will probably make 2022, since I just don't see it being a 16 month map or longer. ETS2 maps are 16-18 months, not Montana with its 13-16 cities.

And there's still the possibility of bundling entering the equation. But considering how many times Pavel mentioned the desire to decrease the time between releases going forward after Texas, I think it's very unlikely that bundling states will start just yet. Let the states surrounding Texas come out as individual states to pump out states and give the new team makeups post-Texas get experience finishing a product together.

TL;DR I have no earthly idea what's going on, this is just predictions that have little basis in fact because there is very little evidence to go off of post-Montana.
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | see profile for link to Germany cities and Switzerland rework maps
prediction maps: Greece | ATS 2024-2025 DLCs
research map: Upper Midwest (work in progress)
User avatar
clifflandmark
Posts: 904
Joined: 13 Oct 2020 16:36
Location: Urfa
Contact:

Re: Louisiana Discussion Thread

#40 Post by clifflandmark » 13 Sep 2021 22:00

flight50 wrote: 13 Sep 2021 17:00 or go back to my fish hobby.
I suspected that you were the guy in this video. Now I have no doubts. Here's why you quit the fish and started ATS. :D

I thought there are bridges or roads under I-10. There's nothing there but swamp.

This is a lenghten road build on swamp to Port Fourchon. Do trucks allowed to be driven ?
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: befsztyk, RacerToft, Snowship and 12 guests