ATS concept map (fanmade)

Shiva
Posts: 1753
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#901 Post by Shiva » 15 Jul 2020 06:30

fra_ba, I would have loved to have that ingame. Same with ID-21. On the latter I still keep my hope up.
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
flight50
Posts: 14722
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#902 Post by flight50 » 15 Jul 2020 07:00

^Agreed but that road is so restricted that not all loads can go thru there. It restricted by trailer length according to Rand McNally. Its still a long way to an interstate though. The best route for Salmon is thru Montana. Via US-93 to I-90 and to US-93 to MT-43 to get to I-15 once Montana comes. Montana hopefully is 1.5 years away though. I think its kinda sinking in to expect nothing East of the current state's borders.

ads678
Posts: 334
Joined: 27 Nov 2018 15:56
Location: Eastern Europe

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#903 Post by ads678 » 15 Jul 2020 07:26

US-550 in Colorado is also restricted, but it will be there. And this is a game anyway. Detour through CH-17/ID-21 is acceptable compared to that horrible gap that we have now.
There were at least 2 possibilities to make the map more attractive (CH-17/ID-21 and road through Lolo,MT), but surprisingly SCS didn't use any of them, which is very disappointing. I'd prefer one of these 2 routes over connection between Elko and Mountain Home.

User avatar
Bedavd
Posts: 502
Joined: 31 May 2018 15:09
Location: Michigan

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#904 Post by Bedavd » 15 Jul 2020 12:48

Remember when people were trying to advocate for Elk City, too? Way back just after Washington was released.

@flight50 I think that if the issue with Salmon is as big as people feel it is going to be, and enough people are vocal about it, then there is a very real chance that SCS could retroactively add the 12-93 connection. They do listen to us, they fixed up Vegas and added NV 319 & the missing portion of US 191. But I don't have to tell you that, you've been preaching this for a while now. I'm just saying, SCS adding roads to a DLC to fix gaps isn't exactly unheard of. Don't lose hope!

IMHO, 12-93 would only serve to benefit Idaho and would detract little to nothing from Montana. Might even boost sales a bit to have a little preview of another state. But I'm not a video game developer so maybe there's something I'm not considering that's holding them back.
Check out my Michigan research map!

Check out my ATS IRL map!
*IDAHO ADDED, LA, SF, and San Diego are unmapped out of protest for their future rework*

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 14722
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#905 Post by flight50 » 15 Jul 2020 13:53

@ads678 You are correct that US-550 is restricted but its not the same as ID-21 still. Rand McNally list US-550 as a STAA route. That means you can at least take pups on it with out issues. ID-21 is not listed as a STAA route. Now Rand McNally is not the 100% say so, but its a pretty good guide for SCS to build from and that's what they are starting to use. ID-21 if in the game, SCS can't safe guard against people taking 48' plus trailers and having major issues. I do think it would have helped a bit but then SCS would be forced to make that road unrealistically straighter than it really is.

@Bedavd you are correct. The way I look at it though is day one, how does everything flow. Idaho could have gotten at least the road connections in the existing states like OR-11 and US-2. We got ID-51 out of nowhere. I just posted a map here that to me, makes a bit more sense once all said and done. So yes, there is time and possible hope to get more added. If this can happen well before Montana comes, all is good. This is the most, I'd expect out of Idaho. There isn't much more they can do outside of that map I linked imo. ID-21 is 50/50 to me. Otherwise, we have a 1.5 year wait perhaps for Montana to help Idaho out.

Idaho is $12 and just like Utah, people are going to talk. They will look beyond pretty and there will be more people outside of this forum that will definitely speak the same way we are talking. I don't like to hear negative talk about the devs but this one here, would be of their doing when some things could have been added to diminished negative talk imo. This is the first paid dlc that I have been so critical of. I am okay with some things misses, but you can't miss so many roads and not introduce any new companies or industries as that creates talk. In this situation in my opinion, they might be able to get away without doing one or two. Not all three with roads, companies and industries.

User avatar
Bedavd
Posts: 502
Joined: 31 May 2018 15:09
Location: Michigan

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#906 Post by Bedavd » 15 Jul 2020 14:17

@flight50 I hear you, I do. I take some consolation in the fact that they’ve already announced the beverage, and wind power industry, plus DIA as a new one off. I would have loved to see more in Idaho, but we got what I was expecting we’d get. Colorado, however, is shaping up to look really nice.
Check out my Michigan research map!

Check out my ATS IRL map!
*IDAHO ADDED, LA, SF, and San Diego are unmapped out of protest for their future rework*

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 14722
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#907 Post by flight50 » 15 Jul 2020 15:30

Yeah, I am way more excited about Colorado anyways. I have been even before Idaho was even announced as being next. We sort of expected Colorado to be a 2020 map along side Idaho.

ads678
Posts: 334
Joined: 27 Nov 2018 15:56
Location: Eastern Europe

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#908 Post by ads678 » 16 Jul 2020 06:59

flight50 wrote:
15 Jul 2020 13:53
@ads678 You are correct that US-550 is restricted but its not the same as ID-21 still. Rand McNally list US-550 as a STAA route. That means you can at least take pups on it with out issues. ID-21 is not listed as a STAA route. Now Rand McNally is not the 100% say so, but its a pretty good guide for SCS to build from and that's what they are starting to use. ID-21 if in the game, SCS can't safe guard against people taking 48' plus trailers and having major issues. I do think it would have helped a bit but then SCS would be forced to make that road unrealistically straighter than it really is.
Ok, looks like ID-21/CH-17 can't be added. So US-12/US-93 through Lolo should be included in Idaho DLC then. Salmon is not just a dead end like Jackpot or Vernal, it's much worse. I don't know why developers don't understand this. This has been discussed many times.

angrybirdseller
Posts: 2204
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#909 Post by angrybirdseller » 16 Jul 2020 08:00

Always going to be short term deadends till the map expands. Think city importance is large factor if connection within the DLC is warranted.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 14722
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#910 Post by flight50 » 16 Jul 2020 08:04

I agree that there will always be deadend ends at somepoint. But again, Salmon is no regular dead end. I posted a link for the Salmon/Jackpot comparison a few pages back since Jackpot's dead end keeps coming up.

Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: pigbrother, plykkegaard, poozykrem and 10 guests