Oklahoma Discussion Thread

[SuchManor]

With the road density in game compared to real life, detours will never work. Any sane player will keep them off.

[flight50]

That's just it, you can't compare 1:1 real world with a 1:20 world. Yes that will never work. But the density we got in Texas is beyond what most expected. Compared to the West, we should get much denser moving forward. I say much denser but I'd say 30-35% more road density than the West minimum and this is due to the terrain being more friendly than the huge mountain models required in the West. East of the Rockies the terrain models are much smaller, more vegetation to hide beyond roads that can bring density. These states are getting smaller, so if SCS wants to continue with 11.99 solo states, more roads is almost a must to stay justified in price asked. Most states will avg 8-9 cities I bet. No point in cramping the states up.

Looking at ADS678's map, even his map is conservative. SCS adds just a lil more than his map. Look at I-35 and East of it and if people expect more density than that, no most of you will not use detours. But ADS's map is where I would put the divide for density.........I-35/I-29/I-49 and East of it. Its a feature that isn't for everyone but if SCS modifies it on how it works, we wouldn't have to unrealistically backtrack 2+ hrs.
viewtopic.php?p=1187772#p1187772

[Gormanbros]

I'll second that notion. With just we know already about Oklahoma and it's road network it seems denser than ads map and features Idabel as a likely marked city. Not to mention Pittsburg in Kansas, another surprise addition.

I will say, I'm glad ads's map is a little lower density than the final product in TX and likely OK. Makes the official map more exciting when it's denser than many of our expectations.

[flight50]

^Agreed. Ads's map is more like a guideline....a blueprint minimum of what we could expect to get. When SCS revealed the Texas map, I was surprised at the density. It was about 25%-30% denser than I thought it would be. Washington is pretty close to Oklahoma in sized and they packed Washington pretty good. But there's a huge difference between Washington and Oklahoma...........the terrain. It much friendlier to design for the map designers. I think a lot of people underestimate the size of terrains in the West.

SCS is always coming up with new techniques in their game world. One big one is showing distant models and how they came up with viewing tricks when things are back to back. Example is 2 major depot areas that are part of 2 back to back areas that are not accessed by the same road. Someone linked a video showing this trick. I want to say it was xxCarl1992xxx. But I could be wrong. But it showed how SCS can cram more stuff into limited space and not effect beyond and do it without a ton of trees. This is why I think East of I-35/49/29, the vegetation will prove to allow SCS tons of freedom with cut planes to cram in that 30-35% more road density. I think there's a good chance Oklahoma will be a tad denser than Washington to set the tone East of the Rockies.

Not only that, but SCS has proven that when a map dlc releases, they are still willing to work it and bring new roads/cities. ATS maps are on a time schedule considering there are more releases than 1 dlc (excluding Wyoming since 1019). They need to get dlc's out within 1-2 month as planned. So its basically drop pencils and polish the map for release. Add to it later. But at least we get what they have as they continue working the recently dropped dlc. Seems like they can spare 2-3 people considering the rest of their colleagues are just getting started on their next project. Those 2-3 that stayed beyond, can catch up later and rejoin the others that moved on. Considering the next projects are so early on, SCS is okay to leave 2-3 behind and work on fan demands. This was shown with Yellowstone, with US-14, with Cody Wyoming, with US-20 connecting Idaho Falls to W Yellowstone and now Texas 2.0. For me, it shows that the map teams are passionate enough to make a more complete dlc.

[Shiva]

^Yep, I'm hoping US-62 links up to US-83. US-62 to at least I-44. Its not terribly long but it does provide density and an alternate route.

I do think that US-62, between US-83 and I-44 should be possible. And will be in. I could be wrong.

[Marc-Antoine]

Hello,

You may have seen it while exploring but I found these two panels. [ external image ]

It's pretty cool I think

[flight50]

@Marc-Antoine Yes SuchManor posted the panel on March 14th here viewtopic.php?p=1797312#p1797312. Thanks though.

Looks like you are in Durant Oklahoma off US-75.

[oldmanclippy]

Hopefully we can get an Oklahoma blog this week. It's been 3 weeks since the last one, and if the DLC is coming in June or July then I would think the blog posts would need to start ramping up pretty soon.

[Quark]

Wouldn't worry too much yet. Idaho for example got released mid July too and start of the "hot phase" with partly weekly blog post releases we got to see only from May on. But i'm also sure we'll get one this week.

[flight50]

There's a lot in the cue map wise in which we can get fed. Oklahoma, Kansas, California phase 3 and maybe even Texas 2.0. For ETS2 there's WB and Switzerland. That covers maps and we should get at least one of the above a week.

Then there's everything else that could be a surprise. But for Oklahoma, I'm keeping my fingers crossed for the processing depot to finally come to ATS.