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

[Sara]

Hopefully. I'm am sitting on the edge of my chair to see the next phase of California. But the absolute must is Northern Nevada, or atleast along the I-80, and before Nebraska. As we continue moving east with each new DLC, the I-80 is going to be one of the most importance, between the West Coast and the east.

[Tristman]

1.49 likely runs into the same issue just replace OK with KS. It will though come when it's ready. I'm just speculating here on 100% based what I would do but if Phase 3 was as far along as we have taken to believe it was/is. I'd try to include it with Northern NV, so suddenly the Bay area and much more of the northern map are wide open. But that's just me.

We could consider the possibility that 1.49 is a fall update and comes with Cali ph3, and then KS is a 1.50 release just before Christmas.
But yeah, I would also love to see a northern NV rework coinciding with the next CA phase.

[oldmanclippy]

I think Kansas for 1.49 is a pretty good bet. Presumably it has been in full production for at least 4 months now. September would be 10 months which would be a fair amount of time I think. Wyoming was 9 months with a small team of newbies. A presumably bigger chunk of people from the experienced Texas team should be able to knock out Kansas in ~10 I'd say. I really do think 2023 will be the year where ATS gets 3 maps. Oklahoma in early Summer, Kansas in late Summer / early Fall, and the 3rd state in late Fall. So if we get a DLC every update, then it doesn't matter when CA Phase 3 comes. It'll be releasing close to a DLC either way.

[flight50]

Iirc, Wyoming had 10-11, mostly newbies and Davido. I am sure he had a a few seniors for city builds.

But yeah I agree 1.48, 1.49 and 1.50 could potentially bring ATS map dlc's. If Oklahoma is targeting June/July, Kansas September/October and that last one November/December taking the old ETS2 spot, California slides into a slot in which a GP states releases no matter what.

California going to 1.49 will only raise more expectations and to be honest, I don't think it will live up to what I think it should be economy wise. I'm not too confident that California is focusing on more than visuals like Idaho. I'd lovvvvvvvvve to be wrong. Where's the California matching economy? I wasn't too impressed with phase 2 economy. Huge opportunity to bring several new company chains on a national level. It should start with the base map. Adding at least a dozen new national companies to California goes for the entire US. This should make it extremely easy on map designers populating industry in big cities and midsized cities. Not sure why SCS isn't taking advantage of this considering how consistent US retailers are nationally. California needs at least 30-35% minimum new economy compared to what we have now.

[A J K 91]

When 1.47 is out, phase 3 blogs need to start shortly thereafter if they plan to blog all cities, and maybe 2-3 other topics. A blog every 2 weeks, then it takes 3-4 months, in phase 2 the city blogs usually came after 2 weeks. Assuming 1.48 includes California. If that is not the case, it would be a severe disappointment for me. I'm getting really impatient after the long time without information.

[flight50]

I think no phase 3 for 1.48 will be a disappointment for a lot of people. I'm not too concerned right now but 1.48 is a different story. If SCS came out and said something like we are expanding the scope for phase 3, no big deal. But like I was saying the other day, Phase 3 is like Texas. The longer it takes to release, the higher the expectations. No doubt things will look good. Since 2020, the maps look great. But what about other things now. The game engine may or may not release for 1.48. If it does, that would justify them holding onto phase 3 to implement the new engine. Otherwise, phase 3 can at least take on the Texas approach and get it out under the current engine and upgrade it later for the new game engine update.

If 2023 is the big splash for the engine update, ATS is typically always the guinea pig for new things. So that would put Oklahoma or reworks in the mix to test out before ETS2. The smaller game with the smaller player base has less impact on the community. 1.47 isn't publicly out yet but chances are we are getting everything we will get.

[A J K 91]

Imagine California comes with 1.48, and then only with SF, SJ and Oakland, maybe US-50, that would really be very little. I'm incredibly excited to see what comes with Phase 3.

[Quark]

Of course you are right. Texas 2.0 is a requirement for Oklahoma, I didn't think of that at all. . Only California remains. Do you think Texas could add 2-3 more cities? Sherman, Paris, Texarkana, Pampa and Perryton might be possible. This could be a spectacular summer.

Quote removed - Don't quote images - Rule 2.3

Slightly off topic, but Simon also mentioned in the Texas release stream that they have something in the plans for "the south". some people including me speculated he could mean Presidio/Big Bend. Question is, planned for "texas 2.0" or some time later? Anyhow, if it should actually come with 1.48 then similar to near Oklahoma, something could perhaps be already seen there. Personally won't download the beta in the near future. Maybe someone could look or has already looked and nothing is there?

[flight50]

Yes I remember that mention of the South in Texas. Oklahoma would be the push though so South Texas could get postponed til after Oklahoma arrives. The Northern edges of Texas must come in order for Oklahoma to come but anything in the South can wait til another date if need be.

Texas 2.0, California phase 3 and Oklahoma coming together for 1.48 would generate a lot of hype. Only the game engine update can overshadow all that. Its possible open beta, Texas 2.0 and California would be part of the big hype until Oklahoma comes. Now of course I'm just speculating here but its all possible. The possibility itself is intriguing.

[oldmanclippy]

IIRC there is/was a rough draft of Big Bend in the map editor. I haven't checked myself.