Utah Discussion Thread

raskol
Posts: 164
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 09:20

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2931 Post by raskol » 09 Jun 2022 17:43

friends Wyoming dlc us-14 road is coming, but utah route ut-95 and ut-12 should come, let's make a survey, utah middle is missing scs software, this annoying survey should be done, utah dlc will also receive an additional road
raskol
Posts: 164
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 09:20

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2932 Post by raskol » 09 Jun 2022 17:50

friends Wyoming dlc 1.45 yellowstone park is coming but utah route 95 route 12 route 24 come utah mid utah big gap seems to be done poll should be done if we raise our voice maybe scs software will evaluate
Freeze338
Posts: 1401
Joined: 15 Nov 2016 21:09

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2933 Post by Freeze338 » 10 Jun 2022 09:55

I'm shouting all the time but didn't see any movement for Utah. Utah is my least favorite DLC because of the SLC mountains and huge gap Hanksville belong.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30156
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2934 Post by flight50 » 10 Jun 2022 11:22

Here is the thing about Utah. States that came after it, SCS is getting in some of this non trucking type stuff a lot more. The tourist aspect do bring some excitement. The new hidden road feature is a plus. Not everyone thinks these non truck route should even be in the game. Many do actually appreciate them. SCS came up with a good compromise imho.

If a road has a restriction for trucks, its mostly avoided by SCS in the past. I see Southern Utah falling victim to this. Not to mention, Utah was rushed as it was in production kind of along side Idaho. There where several proposed roads for Utah based on the old Utah dds file. Both Idaho and Utah where Jakub jobs and his team was small. So both of his previous projects was kind of rushed and a lot was missing. His reworks for California is a lot better. Glad he got the chance to lead a team with a state with more punch.

Now with said, his reworks team should indeed revisit all the current paid dlc's to update them once the base map is rebuilt. Utah's South is perhaps the largest project to pull off. That means missing roads in other states won't be that bad to work. I think US-26 and AZ-264 or AZ-260 would be the longest outside of Utah.
Shiva
Posts: 4967
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2935 Post by Shiva » 10 Jun 2022 11:59

If space, add them, but keep truck GPS from routing trucks there. Tourist roads.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/37.7496 ... m2!4m1!3e0 I do wish to see.
It has some lenght/width limits somewhere, that I do not remember right now, but regular sized semi-trucks can drive the route, as far as I remember.
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.
Trakaplex
Posts: 833
Joined: 13 Jan 2021 23:24
Location: Plano, TX

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2936 Post by Trakaplex » 10 Jun 2022 14:05

Freeze338 wrote: 10 Jun 2022 09:55 I'm shouting all the time but didn't see any movement for Utah. Utah is my least favorite DLC because of the SLC mountains and huge gap Hanksville belong.
True. Same here. The mountains are too close to SLC to where you can see a wall technically. As I said in another thread, they left a lot out in the cities. Like in Heber City, they left out almost all of downtown. The road pavement in Monticello is concrete. SCS has US-491 between Monticello and Cortez concrete when in real life it's tar. I've been on that road irl. And I already talked about the misaligned US-89/US-6 junction. SB US-89 is not west of NB US-89 from US-6. Been down there too and it's more like a canyon dip. Along that route, there are also a lot more trees.

Second: they could redo Brigham City and unblock US-89 from Ogden to there, without taking I-15. Brigham City looks like a small neighborhood when irl it's a way more bustling town. Another road pavement they got incorrect was I-15 through Sandy (Taylorsville area).

As I said in the base map redo thread, the Utah towns seem lacking compared to that of Wyoming. Driving through Moab, it was more bustling and had a lot more lights. UT-128 isn't marked on any sign. And they should add the Arches Road, but simply cut it off. I think Jackson, WY is a good comparison to a town SCS can capably do with current standards.

Hanksville definitely a yes.
Rule 2.3 - GDPR Violation
Optional Features
Posts: 4784
Joined: 26 Sep 2019 20:14

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2937 Post by Optional Features » 10 Jun 2022 14:13

As @koolizz and I were discussing yesterday, Utah needs offroad routes. Truckers deliver to remote areas all the time. Some of these are ranches; some are mines or oil drilling sites, and some might be remote military outposts or research facilities. The game so far in all states lacks really any kind of road to nowhere philosophy: everything is right on the highway.

SCS could take some creative liberty and add in some loosely inspired offroad routes in the hole and greatly improve things.
Shiva
Posts: 4967
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2938 Post by Shiva » 10 Jun 2022 14:46

Trakaplex, you mean the exit that is marked as US-89 on US-6? But is Powerhouse Rd, Spanish Fork, IRL? Fuel station / rest stop. It's rather wrongly marked, than misaligned.
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.
IamTheOne
Posts: 198
Joined: 23 Aug 2018 19:17

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2939 Post by IamTheOne » 10 Jun 2022 15:07

The problem with the state of Utah is that gameplay-wise, it is very much a "transit state"- you go through the state in order to access other states by way of Interstates 15, 70 & 80. As the game's map size continues to expand, this problem will continue to grow.

Is the solution really to add more secondary roads that less players will use as the general map expands eastwards? The game unfortunately can't fix issues of real-life geography and road design, so whether or not you add more roads it's still going to be an unpopular state to drive through.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30156
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Utah Discussion Thread

#2940 Post by flight50 » 10 Jun 2022 15:24

seriousmods wrote: 10 Jun 2022 14:13 The game so far in all states lacks really any kind of road to nowhere philosophy: everything is right on the highway.
What do you mean....right on the highway? Highway as in interstates or highway as in US and/or State roads? Either way, I'll have to disagree with that. There are industries in which are not off the highway. It also depend on what you refer to as right off the road. We talking 10-20 feet off the road or 2-3 miles off the road? All mines and logging sites are pushed back so those 2 alone makes the statement false. Wind farms aren't exactly close to the road itself as they are pushed back. The way I see it, if you can't see the main road that you came in on.....its pushed back and not off the road.

In theory, I agree that some things further back from the road would be cool but that only applies to certain industries. There is a lot of space off the roads I agree and this is where some of the largest off road prefabs can exist. But we really only have farms, mines, logging, oil/gas sites, solar field if we ever get it (ETS2 has it already) and vineyards. If complex prefabs ever come...this is where they should be. Especially for oil/gas and farming. Montana will be bring Waste Management. I am sure that falls in line with these others.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DEDE62, Gasconha18, KaLypso, MattB2100 and 12 guests