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

[harishw8r]

The recent Kansas blog gave me more hope about map reworks. If each map project has 10 mappers, there are still some 10-20 unaccounted for. I don’t think they would start a third DLC, but instead they would focus on other stuff. The possibilities are endless here: Texas 2.0, Northern Nevada, Southern Utah, SLC rework etc. I hope that’s the case.

[paytonsnewheart]

Do you think anyone is working on Nebraska?

[harishw8r]

As I said, I’m still having mixed thoughts about a third DLC in the works (I mean, at mapping stage).

[flight50]

I don't rule anything out with SCS. Those 10-20 could be working on anything map related. One thing for sure is that they being allocated somewhere.

[Calibuddy99]

I think that in phase 3 of the rework, SCS should make some modifications to Sacramento. Obviously we want to see CA-99 from Stockton, but there's more than just that. In Phase 2, SCS did a pretty good job on creating Sacramento in a realistic way. They got I-80 right, which is great. They also got I-5 pretty accurate, just missing an exit or two in my opinion. US 50 they did a good job making the junctions, but they should've made 1 more in downtown. I would like to see Business 80 introduced, as I've been down that many times in Sacramento. Part of that freeway is the oldest section of freeway in Sacramento IRL, which means it should be introduced. As for recreating the I-80 and Business 80 junction, they could slightly shorten the length of the mountain section of I-80, and maybe make something weird like a 4 lane or 5 lane on one side, and 3 or 4 on the other. I just want the junction to be realistic at that spot. I would totally go for 6 lanes westbound, but first, there's not enough space for another interchange, and having the road widen for 2 lanes westbound to 6 lanes westbound without 1 interchange along the way would be very unrealistic, and second, there isn't even a 6 lane one way freeway model in the game. So 5 is the maximum I'd go for. I'd suggest somewhere in the mountains westbound could change from 2 to 3 lanes, and then just before the junction, they could make it 5 lanes by making 1 new lane pop up to the left, and 1 to the right, if you get what I mean. And at the big turbine interchange junction, 3 lanes could follow I-80, and 2 could exit to Business 80. I'd want at least one junction with a regular street, if not 2 along this route. And then, they could make CA-160 through downtown and finally make downtown drivable. And at the junction, Business 80 would terminate right there, just like real life(or I assume because Business 80 is no longer signed on US 50, only the secret CA-51 section is signed as Business 80 IRL) and you'd continue straight on 99, or you could exit to US-50 east or westbound. That sound pretty crazy, but I think SCS could do that. It's not way too much new stuff, and they could easily make some slight changes to I-80 in the mountains, just make some spots a bit more curvy and there you go, enough room to do this! As for I-80 from Business 80 to I-5/CA-99, that is fine with no junction, but I guess if they have just enough room to squeeze it in, they could possibly add Watt Avenue. I hope that SCS reads this, and can do this, because all of that would sure make Sacramento even better in this game. I can totally see why any of you here in this topic would disagree with a lot of this whole new road idea thing, but I think at least part of it is possible. I just hope they do at least something out of this whole idea. Also, please let me know your opinions on my idea. I just wanna see SCS make a bit more modifications to Sacramento, because I want the road networks in this game to be as close to real life as possible. I'd love to go straight back to Sacramento just for something new of this. Since Chico doesn't exist in this game, the next best thing is to make Sacramento as good as they can, since I think Sacramento is one of the cooler cities of California. And you can easily see that I live in Chico, which is another reason why I consider Sacramento to be the next best city to make good. Also, sorry for the really long reply.

[harishw8r]

Agree with flight’s comment about anything being possible with SCS. Personally I would like them to go back and fix almost all the weak points. With CA already being worked on, there are not a lot of them. Now is the right time to fix all those minor stuff.

[Shiva]

Calibuddy99, adding Business 80, that would take way much space, space there is not in this scale.
Atleast if one wants to keep Donner Pass etc.
+ you did a big wall of text.

There might maybe, maybe be a small chance, that SCS might add the US-50/CA-99 interchange.
Or they might merge CA-99 to Power Inn Rd. I think this latter might be more possible.
If CA-99 goes all the way to US-50.

[flight50]

I definitely think SCS will or should rework Sacramento to get CA-99 to US-50. I do agree with Shiva though that Business 80 is tight but there should be a ton of space East of Sacramento to play with before we hit Lake Tahoe. Take some of that space to spread out the CA-99 @ US-50 interchange. Between I-5 and CA-99, that portion of Business 80 could happen if they rework Sacramento some. That stretch of Business 80 can be about the distance they made in all the big cities in Texas between junctions. More specifically DFW. Those junctions are close and they cut out a lot, but at 1:20 scale, nothing much else they can do. I see the same here in Sacramento.

CA-99 into Sacramento should be continuous all the way to US-50. Its really a highway and should be treated like that connecting Sacramento and Modesto for phase 3. This go around, CA-99 will be justified I bet and it should be a highway moving forward connecting to I-5 South of Bakersfield. So for me...........not terminating CA-99 to a street is the ideal plan. We won't get CA-99 running thru Sacramento but connecting it to Sacramento from Bakersfield makes sense.

If Stockton is moving East like mentioned in a blog (iirc), then that gives space to rework I-5/Sacramento and that should give space for CA-99 to connect to Sacramento. I assume Placerville makes the game this time as scenic. We could get a remote depot there. Its about the only settlement that is a must on US-50 between Sacramento and Carson City.

[harishw8r]

Moving Stockton east was mentioned in a stream, and the most plausible reason to me to do so is connect CA-99 to Sacramento. Waiting for the end result.

Speculating the possible blog posts:
SF-Oakland
Fresno
San Jose
Tioga Pass
Some Agricultural blog?
New Industries?

[rbsanford]

Reworks to industry was mentioned in the Phase III blog post, so I could see a blog dedicated to that, assuming this means new/expanded industries; this could tie into agriculture, too. I also think there will be posts about Modesto and US 50, since they're new, and they made a point of mentioning them in the announcement post. They also talk a lot about smaller, secondary roads, so there could be a post dedicated to that (there are some interesting opportunities here, like CA 152; CA 17, which has some dangerous curves; and CA 130, a very scenic road that could take the role of the odd, unnumbered, one-lane road we currently have through the mountains). If the 395 is part of this phase, like I'm hoping, then that could have its own post too.

Speaking of Tioga Pass, I wonder what they'll do with Yosemite. It would be amazing if they could work in Yosemite Valley, especially if CA 41 connects it to Fresno; that way we could get the Tunnel View. Big Oak Flat Road (the western end of which already being in the game) can connect the valley to CA 120, with more amazing views. If they go this route, the rework team needs to get whoever did Going to the Sun to be in charge of Yosemite.