Poll: Choose (3) States you would like to see next

[flight50]

One reason I am interested in seeing bundles of 2-3 states is to see how SCS deals with cities on border. Cities like Portland and Vancouver, Wa. Imo, Portland took up too much space and pushed Vancouver. That in turn effected Longview a tad with having too little space left. If they develop such instances together, the planning could work out better. That or roads are laid out for both bordering cities as part of preliminary production. I think SCS started doing the later part already though. Layout of roads ahead of time is critical as it pencils in what can be done before the full production team kicks in. Kansas City/Overland Park, Duluth/Superior, Chicago/Gary, Louisville/Jefferson, etc just to name a few. Whether both sides of a river or state lines bring both cities as marked, more than likely depends on industry available. So the economy in these places would be ideal imo to have their full economy at once, vs waiting to add to later.

With states getting smaller, SCS should pretty much shift thinking with value for the money. Mapping is about to become a bit easier due to the type of terrain they are heading into. Compact so more gets cut out. We'll still get the same level of quality though. Washington is pretty much the limit of how compact a state can be. At the same time, Washington has mountainous and hill terrains so larger terrain models. That all takes up space. Pushing East, the same vegetation and tree walls don't have the same elevated situations. So I really hope some compact roads can squeeze in. I really like the numbers ATS has on the map team now so it will be cool to see 2023 and beyond on how this thing plays out. I think Pavel would also love to see the US at least completed while he is still here with us on earth as he has also let it be know that he'd like increased production. Seems to me, they are on their way to being able to kick out more with the numbers now.

Based on Wyoming and Montana, the speed at which those at least, has dropped the time it takes to kick out a release. Whether the newer mappers are just faster, easier dlc's to model that previous or better tools to map, no telling but I do see 1-2 months being shaved off mapping time come 2023 with smaller states on the menu to finish up the US.

[VTXcnME]

They'll always have border cities. There's always places that are going to bump up against other locations. Unavoidable unless SCS decides to stop DLC release and finish the US 48 and release it as one massive DLC for $75+ in four years time.

As you suggest, I'm hoping SCS learned from the early mistakes and moved to preplanning future DLC (at least looking at where things might be tight). That's a better method for dealing with overcrowding me thinks.

There will still be terrain challenges with the Appalacian mountains, Great Smokey Mountains, White Mountains, and Green Mountains. States impacted by mountain chains: Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire.

As far as DLC release times and speed, I don't wanna start repeating myself over and over. But it really should be quicker once the large states are done (OK,KS,NE,SD,ND) after those states, then we could talk about bundling multiple states into one DLC to maintain a size, that would be more in keeping with SCS's current state DLC size/price point.

[CodArk2]

There are several other mountain chains in states besides the Appalachians and New England states.

South Dakota has the Black hills, which despite its name is a mountain range: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hills
Oklahoma has two of its own mountain ranges and parts of two more:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wichita_Mountains
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbuckle_Mountains

Arkansas and Missouri. has the Ozark Mountains:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozarks

Arkansas has the Ouachita Mountains:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouachita_Mountains

Arkansas and Oklahoma both have several different mountain ranges in them. They rent the "naked mountains" you get in the west so they aren't quite as dramatic, but they are nonetheless mountains.

I think when it comes to states going forward, the plains states let them breathe a bit because beside sol=klahoma most of them have low populations and not a lot of big cities or big terrain and they can knock it out more quickly. I expect them to put more content in these states though, they even mentioned more industiries and gameplay mechanics in streams. States like Arkansas and Louisiana will have way more cities than people here probably thin they will. You will NOT get 100+ ,Giles of driving without a city in those states as a city will poke out for behind the trees every40/50 miles or less. I personally want to see the unique things in each state and I think they can make up the size difference with more content. We kinda saw this with Washington State, which had quite a lot of new thing sin it and is still rated highly despite being the smallest DLC we have so far. Size isn't everything.

[flight50]

Agreed that size is not everthing. I also agree that even after Texas, they get in more density Iike Washington. They could even top Washington as the terrain models won't be as huge. I think what we are about to get into now, that is what the detour feature was intended for. It was created a bit ahead of its time. Perhaps SCS has done nothing to improve it since it came and they was waiting on road the density of the Cental Plains.

But yesss. After Texas, things get easier for SCS. They staffed up for Texas and in turn, got staff for even more state releases per year. There's a longggggg way to go in ATS. The manpower is there now to increase production. The rebuild effort is there. Eventually everything will be on par. Not the same level, but on par. I don't expect NM, OR nor Washington to get to Wyoming or Montana detail level. They are good enough still to not need massive overhauls. Maybe 40% updating for NM and even less with the other 2.

Besides textures, implementing new economies and new roads, the older paid dlc's are good. We are about to get into the heavy blogs for Texas but I'm already getting excited about 2023 maps. The beast state will be out and just maybe, just mayyyybe the game engine update too before Oklahoma hits. I wanna see the new potential with the game engine with these smaller states coming. We will soon hit a flood of ICC's if Montana and Texas starts things off finally.

Improved AI, Multi drop, splitting doubles, truck washes, dynamic truck docking, meaningful weigh stations and beneficial scales which allows us to slide tandems after loaded. This all as upgrades for multi drop which could bring controlling pallets on our own trucks. If Cargo Market is to reach it's potential, we must have multi drop and that is when all the above stuff I just mention can come to fruition. Get the above in as the first wave of new features. Then physics, seasons and others can follow.

[VTXcnME]

@CodArk2 Agreed. There are a mess of mountain chains. My list was not in any way meant to be comprehensive. Just that terrain challenges will still be present with ongoing DLC. I was only addressing what @flight50 said with

Mapping is about to become a bit easier due to the type of terrain they are heading into. Compact so more gets cut out. We'll still get the same level of quality though. Washington is pretty much the limit of how compact a state can be. At the same time, Washington has mountainous and hill terrains so larger terrain models. That all takes up space. Pushing East, the same vegetation and tree walls don't have the same elevated situations.

The compactness of Washington along with mountains will be felt in the smaller eastern states too. Mountains/foliage/road networks.

[Trakaplex]

@CodArk2 Agreed. There are a mess of mountain chains. My list was not in any way meant to be comprehensive. Just that terrain challenges will still be present with ongoing DLC. I was only addressing what @flight50 said with

Mapping is about to become a bit easier due to the type of terrain they are heading into. Compact so more gets cut out. We'll still get the same level of quality though. Washington is pretty much the limit of how compact a state can be. At the same time, Washington has mountainous and hill terrains so larger terrain models. That all takes up space. Pushing East, the same vegetation and tree walls don't have the same elevated situations.

The compactness of Washington along with mountains will be felt in the smaller eastern states too. Mountains/foliage/road networks.

Much of the Appalachians aren't taller though. So, we might get a lot more roads. I'd say the trickiest part from here on is the Blue Ridge Mountains and the Smokies. But again, one of the main complaints of map DLCs are the mountains feeling like "hills". It still would be tricky though, since many East Coast based map mods use a scale increase (not making it a good example).

As previously stated, SCS plans to reach all of the continent, so if they do reach BC, YT, or AK (after finishing the 48) or some sort, it might be another difficulty they haven't faced in a while. And not forgetting the quality. Texas might be low by the time Florida comes out. This is why even current DLC's would need a refresh 5-6 years from now.

[VTXcnME]

While not as imposing as the Rockies, getting them right would still add significantly to the feel of the area.

The mountains in game almost feel like they are being modeled after a google streets view. They are there, but you lose that sense of mass, the sense of size.

[clifflandmark]

It won't change their feeling significantly even though they build these hills higher and we won't feel the depth of the scene unless it's 1:1 scaled. You're changing your position 20 times faster compared to real. So they appear as small hills.

[flight50]

^I have to disagree. We are not even there yet and you're already writing them off. We have to give them a chance first before making that statement. I'm sure they could even send a team to the US for research. Paid off for Colorado big time.

[VTXcnME]

There are mountains in the west that need more work, and their are mountain chains in the west they did very well. At 1:20 scale.

SCS is absolutely capable of doing it right at the current scale.