Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

Shiva
Posts: 4671
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#5051 Post by Shiva » 17 Sep 2023 20:08

Where the airport is, yes.
Road to it? No.
That pre Albq, looks similar to a gridded city.
That is from 1:35 scale game.
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
A J K 91
Posts: 97
Joined: 03 Mar 2023 01:45

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#5052 Post by A J K 91 » 18 Sep 2023 01:05

My thoughts on cities that should be added or replaced.

Silver City, NM should replace San Simon, AZ
Blythe, CA should replace Ehrenberg, AZ
Chances of Lake Havasu City, AZ being added?
Prescott, AZ should replace Camp Verde, AZ. Or be additionally marked
Fallon, NV should be added. Or is it too close to Reno, NV and Carson City, NV?
Primm, NV should be downgraded to a scenery town.
San Bernardino, CA should replace Carlsbad, CA
Chico, CA would be nice to see too
SORRY FOR THE BAD ENGLISH. GOOGLE TRANSLATOR.
angrybirdseller
Posts: 3316
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#5053 Post by angrybirdseller » 18 Sep 2023 01:59

Prescott would not count on it as US-95 would be severed off likely need to connect directly to Phoenix. The Lake Havasu would work fine, San Simon should be replaced by Mesa, and Ehrenberg just remove the city. Blythe is 50-50 proposition. Silver City see is 50-50 proposition. San Bernardino is doable city, and Carlsbad would remove it. Primm just remove it, and Fallon is possibility.
User avatar
Sara
Posts: 573
Joined: 05 Nov 2021 17:59
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#5054 Post by Sara » 18 Sep 2023 02:39

SuchManor wrote: 17 Sep 2023 15:23 It doesn't need a complete revamp (the cities do) but it still needs a LOT of work.
I disagree completely. Do keep in mind, this is only my own opinion, but the only thing I could see with NM is just a complete texture update. To some of the roads and to some of the terrain. Apart from that, everything in NM is still looking good. Although I do think Albuquerque needs a overhaul, but more or less, some extra roads to make it better to navigate through while doing deliveries to and from the city. Not a "tear down the city and rebuild it from scratch"
My World of Trucks Profile - Don't mind me, I just drive trucks in ATS!
angrybirdseller
Posts: 3316
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#5055 Post by angrybirdseller » 18 Sep 2023 03:15

New Mexico needs work yes. Just total rebuild no not necessary. Albuquerque can get fixed little bit here and there, but drastic change no it won't happen. The interchanges US-550 and I-25 area may be reconfigured and add some buildings and intersection, but the rest of US-550 leave alone. Skycity interchange off I-40 west of Albuquerque may or may not be reconfigured. An interchange for gas station in Truth and Consequences would like this added. It's just chevron station with pumps accommodation for semi truck. Sure New Mexico and Oregon will get facelifted after base map rebuild, but it will be done over years not the next few years.
User avatar
rbsanford
Posts: 1896
Joined: 15 Sep 2018 02:11
Location: Duluth, MN

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#5056 Post by rbsanford » 18 Sep 2023 04:59

A J K 91 wrote: 18 Sep 2023 01:05 Silver City, NM should replace San Simon, AZ
I think Silver City and US 180 between Alpine and Deming should be added, but It wouldn't make sense to tie that to the base map. Instead, San Simon should be replaced by Douglas; there's plenty of mining work in the area, it would give us more of US 191, and would have a border crossing if Mexico ever becomes a thing (I think Agua Prieta would make sense as a marked city too; imagine having that, with highway 2 connecting it to Juarez via Puerto San Luis). AZ 80 and 90 could connect to Sierra Vista, and ideally the 82 would connect to Nogales. Maybe the 80 could even run as far as Tombstone, just because.

I made a little concept map a while back that also has Globe as a marked city, and its industry is mostly made up of the mines and mine-related industry in that Globe-Superior-Winkelman triangle, so there's another option. When it comes to Nevada, I think it would be worth adding Fallon as marked, even though it's close to Reno and Carson City, and axing Pioche; the Pioche mine can go to Ely, where the Robinson Mine in Ruth would be much better.
The Journeys of Zephyr of the American West

Handy maps and diagrams.

Furthermore, I consider that I-80 across Nevada must be redone next.
Tristman
Posts: 1430
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#5057 Post by Tristman » 18 Sep 2023 09:35

Honestly, I think Albuquerque still holds up pretty well. The industrial zones where most companies are located are a bit too base map, with basic grid patterns and random warehouses. But the big interstate junction and the roads underneath are still pretty cool to this day.
I think other marked cities in NM need an overhaul more urgently, since they have little to make them stand out.
User avatar
SuchManor
Posts: 1008
Joined: 21 Apr 2017 00:04
Location: Virginia, USA
Contact:

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#5058 Post by SuchManor » 18 Sep 2023 18:50

Sara wrote: 18 Sep 2023 02:39 I disagree completely. Do keep in mind, this is only my own opinion, but the only thing I could see with NM is just a complete texture update. To some of the roads and to some of the terrain. Apart from that, everything in NM is still looking good. Although I do think Albuquerque needs a overhaul, but more or less, some extra roads to make it better to navigate through while doing deliveries to and from the city. Not a "tear down the city and rebuild it from scratch"
I’m not sure if you’ve ever been to New Mexico IRL but I have many times. Let me tell you the cities feel nothing like New Mexico in real life. They absolutely need to be reworked from the ground up imo. Incorrect street layouts, random prefabs, missing detail and unique buildings, low res textures, and more. It’s almost unrecognizable trying to compare both. NM needs to at least be on Idaho level and it currently is not that. It needs a lot of work. I’m not saying it needs to be done ASAP, but it does need work after the base map is reworked.
What good is a world without good detail?
Check out my screenshots
Shiva
Posts: 4671
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#5059 Post by Shiva » 18 Sep 2023 20:41

Gallup ain't that bad, regarding road layout.
Same with Socorro.
Ofcource graphics etc could get to today's level.
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.
Tristman
Posts: 1430
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#5060 Post by Tristman » 18 Sep 2023 22:05

Gallup is pretty nice imo, Socorro feels super generic and has nothing going for it.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests