Louisiana Discussion Thread

[harishw8r]

I don’t think the reports were that conflicting. As you said, only a few might be working on Oklahoma (assuming it’s next) DLC, and every other possible resource is on Texas - just like what every rework team goes through. Once Texas is out they would be assigned back to their respective map DLCs. Whether they bundle Kansas with Oklahoma would be my question. They keep recruiting more mappers so it may not be an impossibility.

[flight50]

Once we get to the smaller states east of Texas, we have to start thinking of multi-state bundles. It would have made no sense if, for example, expansion into the Baltics included ONLY Lithuania, then Latvia, Estonia, and Finland each as separate paid DLCs. This could go several ways. I'm thinking Louisiana+Mississippi+Alabama, and maybe even throw Tennessee and Arkansas into the mix. Though adding the latter two really can't be done without Oklahoma.

Minnesota could be its own DLC. The Dakotas could be their own DLC. The prairie states (Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, Oklahoma) could be their own DLC. And so on as you further east.

You may want to pump the brakes there. That is wayyyyyyyy to many dlc's you are bundling. ATS is not ETS2. Each ATS states is typically larger than a single ETS2 country. Although the US states do get smaller, they are still larger than most European countries. What you are asking for is too much to expect within a 12 month period. To get an ATS dlc within 12 months, we have to assume SCS sticks to 100-115 sq miles of state(s) if a small team of lets say 8-9 will be on it. What can't happen is eating up resources like Texas again. Now if the goal is to have 30 ATS mappers only working (1) huge bundle, different story but then we'd only get one map dlc a year. At this point, its to early to get such a size. We don't even have 75% of the US....yet alone half the US mapped. Arkansas+Louisina and the 2 Dakota's are the best true bundles to work on simultaneously as one map team but Pavel needs to put 12-15 people there. 8-9 won't work. 8-9 is only good for each state individually to do in 12 months or less...not each bundle.

I don't think you realize how large of a dlc Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee and Arkansas is so here's an example overlayed over the Baltics that you referenced.


[ external image ]

I agree with the logic of oldmanclippy and werewoooooooolf though. All eggs in the basket to get Texas out the door and as a minimum, we get 2 maps next year for sure. Longshot for 3 next year but there's absolutely a chance. I'm just not going to get hyped for it yet without Pavel's words. It really depends on what's going to come of the rebuild team efforts after Texas. I'm honestly leaning to a Phase 4 California, Phase 1 Nevada though vs phase 4 California and 3 paid maps. I think phase 1 Nevada is critical right now. Phase 1 Nevada is what I'm calling fast track I-80. Get that corridor (Northern Nevada) done and then focus on 3 paid maps staring 2024. The Texas team and Montana team can get rebalanced and go from there. No need to be too greedy with maps for 2023 though. SCS can always hire more help too in order to add to the rebuild team or paid map team. They found a solid Wyoming team. Pavel said there's over 30 ATS mappers for ATS. Perhaps the magic number is 40. There are 4 map leads. Each lead could command a 10 person team. Each state beyond Texas won't demand all 10 on each team so those left can shift around. There is plenttttttty of ATS work to map. So every hand will get used.

[harishw8r]

Personally, I would like to see only two DLCs per year, but larger ones. 2x20 might be better than 4x10 because even if SCS intends to release 3 map DLCs for ATS alone, it might be a bit overwhelming to players and might make things hectic both from a production and marketing standpoint. Eventually, there could be two ETS2-sized map teams operating during winter and summer cycles.

Geographically speaking, if the GP states are bundled, their lack of diversity might be less pronounced than the case where each case is released as separate DLCs.

[55sixxx]

I think phase 1 Nevada is critical right now. Phase 1 Nevada is what I'm calling fast track I-80. Get that corridor (Northern Nevada) done

Definitely. The only sucky part of I-80 currently is the NV stretch, since the Cali part got reworked recently... It needs to be done asap. It is by far the worst part of the base map as it is filled with small hills on each side to lessen the work needed with awful textures all around.

And considering that in-game this area is very sparse, something like shown above is feasible for phase 1.

[Tristman]

^ Yup, this is also what I'd like to see reworked before they finish California.

[flight50]

Yes, that Northern Nevada is what I posted August 1st in the Base map thread already. viewtopic.php?p=1724652#p1724652. This is the Louisiana thread.

[VTXcnME]

Once we get to the smaller states east of Texas, we have to start thinking of multi-state bundles. It would have made no sense if, for example, expansion into the Baltics included ONLY Lithuania, then Latvia, Estonia, and Finland each as separate paid DLCs. This could go several ways. I'm thinking Louisiana+Mississippi+Alabama, and maybe even throw Tennessee and Arkansas into the mix. Though adding the latter two really can't be done without Oklahoma.

Minnesota could be its own DLC. The Dakotas could be their own DLC. The prairie states (Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, Oklahoma) could be their own DLC. And so on as you further east.

People need to think of the eastern/southeastern US as DLC sq mileage bundles. Not as # of states.

I've covered this in other threads, so won't repeat the numbers here, but suffice to say: What we have now are a mess of 'big square' states. They are on the order of 75,000-105-000 square miles, depending on the state. Those all dropped as individual DLC's. So the size of DLC has been set. Obvious notable exceptions are Montana and Texas, but I suspect Texas is going to cost more than the $11.99 price tag that all the others have carried.

Back on point though... DLC is in the ballpark of 75,000-100,000 square miles for $11.99. I can absolutely see SCS continuing that pattern into the east/south east. Louisiana/Alabama come out to roughly 100,000 sq miles as a bundle. Mississippi/Georgia, same again. North/South Carolina come in a little lighter in the 86,000 sq mile range. Virginia/West Virginia 67,000 sq miles. SCS will make a little more on those smaller bundles, and a little less on the larger ones, but it all comes out to average in the wash, right?

Look at square milage, not number of states and I think you get a better idea of what SCS will do going forward. One team will continue to finish the "big squares" of Oklahoma/Kansas/Nebraska/South & North Dakota. Another team is going to work along the Gulf Coast (post Texas release) covering Louisiana/Arkansas, then Mississippi/Alabama. Georgia/Florida. You'll see another team working just north of them with Missouri/Iowa, Illinois/Indiana, Tennessee/Kentucky. Third team fills in Minnesota, Wisconsin/Michigan. Maybe they're the ones that start PA and NY.... bottom line, they aren't going to start bundling 4+ states together. It'll be semi similar biome matching pairs. The only thing to really figure out is what order they'll drop the pairs in.

So- I think logically, it's going to move more in blocks rather than odd "these 5 states" in one DLC. I see max of two states combined into DLC bundles as they move east as that maintains the Square Miles/Price point equality. At least until they get to the Northeast, where New England (ME/NH/VT/MA/CT/RI) will probably be a single DLC bundle given the sum total of the 6 states comes out to 71,xxx square miles. Biome-wise, it's similar enough to be treated as one DLC bundle. New York and Pennsylvania might be big enough to warrant their own DLC space, dunno. It'll depend how the teams move one they really start firing on all cylinders.

[angrybirdseller]

Also, look at road miles, city complexity, area to work with. Landmarks along with asset requirements. People expecting ETS style bundles be prepared to be disappointed.

[flight50]

The only ETS2 style bundle we should get for the US is Texas. All bundles should be within the footprint of 100 sq miles if we are to expect it to be released in 12 months or less.

[angrybirdseller]

I agree, Louisana very likely come in 2024 with Arkansas to square it off.