ATS concept map (fanmade)

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30154
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1211 Post by flight50 » 28 Jun 2022 11:39

No doubt. The biggest issue is that we always have to keep in mind real life vs 1:20 scale. Real life's 1:1 routes will always differ from what's available in the game. Conflicts like terrain models, draw distances, cut planes and polygons all factor into the 1:20 limitations. Sure SCS can go more Reforma style, but that could take us off the Google map trajectory to much. To far off bring unrealistic curves. We don't notice it when driving but looking at the map itself, you notice real quick.

Although ph2 is in, Jakub did say that sometimes they have to go back and even redo some of those parts done already. Nature of the beast with phasing. CA-99 could make it if we get a few backroads to US-50 though. I wouldn't want SCS to redo too much. Use a much as possible to what is there but still keep conscience to truck routes. I see Florin Rd in Sacramento being that back door route. SCS could connect to both I-5 and CA-99 as long as CA-99 is pushed East enough. We only need about a solid 1-1.5 miles between I-5 and CA-99 to make due. Florin can get us to 65th @ US-50, Power Inn Rd @ US-50, Watt Ave @ US-50 or Bradshaw Rd @ US-50. The further East we go, the more out the way travel is into Sacramento though. But for me, the whole point of CA-99 is to bring the necessary agriculture off it.

But to bring more agriculture off CA-99, we need 2-3 new farm companies in the base map. We can only get one Bushnell and one Sunshine Crops per city that are true farms that bring food. Warehouse don't do it but 2-3 new farms can bring new crops, orchids, vineyards.
User avatar
ads678
Posts: 491
Joined: 27 Nov 2018 15:56
Location: Eastern Europe

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1212 Post by ads678 » 28 Jun 2022 14:59

Atsguy99 wrote: 28 Jun 2022 04:12 @ads678 You should add the section of CA 99 from stockton to Sacramento on the map of areas that should be added in the base game. I would suggest you make it red, because it really needs to exist.
This section of CA-99 didn't bother me much. With the current map there is no space for this road. But it seems like it will come with the next California update anyway.

What's bothering me the most is that with every single state DLC release we have 1-2 missing roads that should definitely be included at the start. Montana won't be an exception with missing US-20 connection between Idaho Falls and West Yellowstone (already added to the map of missing roads).
New Mexico: US-285 ends in the middle of nowhere, making the road network in the center of the state a mess. Still not added and there is a big chance we will never see this road.
Oregon: OR-140 (added later, one of my favorite routes in the game), OR-38 (still not added).
Washington: WA-155 Grand Coulee-Omak (still not added).
Utah: UT-56 Cedar City-Panaca (added later), the big hole still not filled.
Idaho: ID-21 Boise-Stanley, WA-20/US-2 Colville-Sandpoint (both still not added).
Colorado: US-24 Colorado Springs-Limon (still not added).
Wyoming: Yellowstone (the main attraction of the state) initially wasn't even planned! Partly added just before the release. Cody and US-14 added later (thankfully).
And now we have Montana. US-20 seemed like a no brainer, so this decision looks strange.
Shiva
Posts: 4967
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1213 Post by Shiva » 28 Jun 2022 15:38

New Mexico: US-285? If SCs removes the musical highway and what there is of the Sandia–Manzano Mountains, then yes, it could be added.

Washington: WA-155 Grand Coulee-Omak ? maybe possible in some way?
Idaho: ID-21 Boise-Stanley, WA-20/US-2 Colville-Sandpoint? That I do want! But it is sort of as threading a needle with a camel, not quite, but, would surely? need an expert mapper.
Colorado: US-24 Colorado Springs-Limon, if the Colorado Springs interchange can be kept an intersection, yeah, should be possible.
US-20? Let us who want it, lobby for it. But let them release the map first? or?

No one mentions ID-28?!
Both ends of it are ingame. Salmon end is there, but ends in a dead end. Sage Junction Port of Entry, part is there too.
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
ads678
Posts: 491
Joined: 27 Nov 2018 15:56
Location: Eastern Europe

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1214 Post by ads678 » 28 Jun 2022 16:05

Why should SCS remove musical highway? US-285 and I-40 junction is far enough to the east from this road, you can see it on my map.
ID-28? I don't see anything special about this road tbh. It is just another alternative route. There are much more important roads yet to be added. When SCS adds all these roads, we can talk about ID-28.
Shiva
Posts: 4967
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1215 Post by Shiva » 28 Jun 2022 16:27

That part is still on the up/downhill of I-40.
You are welcome to add that road yourself to the game.
Would it have been nice, if it could have fitted in? Yes!
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
Calibuddy99
Posts: 327
Joined: 19 Mar 2022 19:38

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1216 Post by Calibuddy99 » 28 Jun 2022 17:58

flight50 wrote: 28 Jun 2022 11:39 No doubt. The biggest issue is that we always have to keep in mind real life vs 1:20 scale. Real life's 1:1 routes will always differ from what's available in the game. Conflicts like terrain models, draw distances, cut planes and polygons all factor into the 1:20 limitations. Sure SCS can go more Reforma style, but that could take us off the Google map trajectory to much. To far off bring unrealistic curves. We don't notice it when driving but looking at the map itself, you notice real quick.

Although ph2 is in, Jakub did say that sometimes they have to go back and even redo some of those parts done already. Nature of the beast with phasing. CA-99 could make it if we get a few backroads to US-50 though. I wouldn't want SCS to redo too much. Use a much as possible to what is there but still keep conscience to truck routes. I see Florin Rd in Sacramento being that back door route. SCS could connect to both I-5 and CA-99 as long as CA-99 is pushed East enough. We only need about a solid 1-1.5 miles between I-5 and CA-99 to make due. Florin can get us to 65th @ US-50, Power Inn Rd @ US-50, Watt Ave @ US-50 or Bradshaw Rd @ US-50. The further East we go, the more out the way travel is into Sacramento though. But for me, the whole point of CA-99 is to bring the necessary agriculture off it.

But to bring more agriculture off CA-99, we need 2-3 new farm companies in the base map. We can only get one Bushnell and one Sunshine Crops per city that are true farms that bring food. Warehouse don't do it but 2-3 new farms can bring new crops, orchids, vineyards.
I suggest SCS make a new company called Northern California Orchards. They can place one of those there, a different building model of Sunshine Crops, and maybe make a company called Sacramento Fruits. That would be cool to me. And if SCS would just make some exits into downtown and allow us to deliver to the Capital Building or other buildings, Then adding 99 and Business 80 would make sense to do. I kind of don't like how they made the Howe Avenue exit instead of Watt Ave. Then it would make a huge amount of sense to add Business 80. I think they should make I-80 more like the Reforma style with auburn, and then going downhill and then right there having this Business Loop 80 exit. and maybe also have that weird stub freeway-looking exit at the interchange as well. What I'm saying is to make it like the 1.43 version of Reforma map, but make it more of an SCS style, maybe have part of the I-80 before the JCT being 5 lanes. Then we would have some junction models for that 5 lane freeway in the map editor and mappers cold put some good use to it with the new junction models. Now I am saying that SCS make it like Reforma, but slighty more SCS style, but not as much SCS style as other areas. Just put slightly less models down so low spec computers can run it without problems.
I also wish that SCS also kept the original areas of Sacramento around the exit 520 that you saw before the rework. But just have those roads be made more realistic. If they remade that area east of the I-5 exit 520 that existed before the rework then we would easily have Business 80 and 99 already. I wish they gave more love with Sacramento in their rework by keeping the original area as well, but make it more realistic. Then we would have Business Loop 80 and CA 99 existing already.
I think that when the rescale happened they should have made the CA 99 intersections in Stockton into freeway interchanges, then we would have the rest of CA 99 to Sacramento in the first place.
Nothing to say here anymore.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30154
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1217 Post by flight50 » 28 Jun 2022 19:48

ads678 wrote: 28 Jun 2022 14:59 What's bothering me the most is that with every single state DLC release we have 1-2 missing roads that should definitely be included at the start. Montana won't be an exception
Agreed. Nature of the beast. The only pass I will give them is that they don't have community feedback until obviously the cat is out the bag. Whether there is lack of coverage on social media or game update revealing the game files we'll find out and comment then. There will always be something missing and 9 times out of time, its related to time constraints and moving on to the next project. Push your workers too hard and they get overwhelmed and quit. Don't push them enough and quality suffers. So balance is key with developing of this game.

I hope with smaller states coming though, Pavel keeps the dlc team sizes the same pretty much. Less people working fewer sectors doesn't work. Now we can't have too many working too many sectors either. 4-5 per dlc for is the max I'd say when the environments are simple. For large cities 1-2 tops per person. But that one extra person on a team is the difference in getting this road or that road.
Ryley03d
Posts: 163
Joined: 19 Jan 2022 23:51

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1218 Post by Ryley03d » 03 Jul 2022 02:50

CO-14 from I-25 to Sterling. Ault would be a scenery town.
Shiva
Posts: 4967
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1219 Post by Shiva » 03 Jul 2022 12:01

Ryley03d, that one? Yes please!
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: 30154
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS concept map (fanmade)

#1220 Post by flight50 » 03 Jul 2022 12:07

I'm not sure it fits honestly. I remember looking at that possibility East of that clover somecrltik to see I-70 terrain models as an issue.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], dat1cactus, dkasper00, Multy, NonanteNeuf, oldmanclippy and 12 guests