Texas Discussion Thread

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30161
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#8431 Post by flight50 » 07 Dec 2022 16:56

635 does not need to be in the game. Get it and here comes all the other complaints about other loops. That's a can of worms opened. Get in a major road that connects US-75 to I-35 and call it a day. Make industry off that road to justify it. Much easier to not do 635. That thing is a beast with nothing but urban development. Bad enough 75 will be a pain but 75 is a must to get to Oklahoma....635 is not a must.

The devs need to be simple with the additional Texas content. I'd rather see them move to a new dlc than to keep complexing Texas. Get the Northeast done and what ever comes in the South and keep it pushing. Texas took enough time. There's a lot more to do post Texas as well as prior to Texas.
Shiva
Posts: 4973
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#8432 Post by Shiva » 08 Dec 2022 00:05

I don't even count on seeing McKinney.
But if they manage to fit it? nice!

Trakaplex, Denison? I don't expect to see it at all.
I would rather see Durant OK.
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: 30161
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#8433 Post by flight50 » 08 Dec 2022 00:41

I too rather see Durant. Imho, get the High 5 in, make US-75 urban up to US-380. McKinney goes scenic. From McKinney to US-82 its mostly vegetation. Make industry off US-75 to 1-2 depots. Preferably one at least be Texas Instruments so either Forest Lane or make it off Renner road. Omit 635 and 190, they just take up space. Only portion of 635 that is needed is what they make of the High 5. If we get Gainesville to Texarkana via US-82, that brings scenic Sherman and Paris. I'd love to have Paris marked instead though but that takes more assets and time. Paris would need to be just as large as Cody was so it takes some work. Paris has a loop and that little half loop that Cody has would be similar in Paris. We don't need the entire loop for Paris.

They can pull US-82 a bit South so that the Red River and Durant makes the game. If US-70 makes the game, US-82 has to pull South anyways. No point in pushing US-82 North imho. I'd skip Denison if we have Sherman. We don't need both imo. The further up US-75, the more thought needs to go to Oklahoma. Missing Durant and the casino won't be a good think for Oklahoma. If US-70 is in from I-35...Durant must be in so that we can take US-70 to hopefully US-259.
Trakaplex
Posts: 833
Joined: 13 Jan 2021 23:24
Location: Plano, TX

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#8434 Post by Trakaplex » 08 Dec 2022 02:17

Actually Paris would make 30 marked cities in the DLC. I never counted on Denison to begin with. Just end US-69 at US-82. Also indefinitely we will get Mineola and Greenville, but will be get Emory? Interesting speculation. TI being scenic would work. Also if they don't have US-380 in Denton, in McKinney, Eldorado would work as well. The Buc-ee's in Melissa is a no, since that would feed up space. Trying to get the urban density in though would be drastic. I've already seen lots of complaints about SCS not "properly" catching the feel of DFW. Scale issues, which is why it's not for Sandpoint and Jackson, WY.

High Five could make it or not, it's 50%. Some of us say no, so they could do more urban area in its place. Simon did say it would be the size of a small scenic town. If no I-635, Northwest could be proper.
Rule 2.3 - GDPR Violation
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30161
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#8435 Post by flight50 » 08 Dec 2022 02:47

No High 5 and yeah Northwest is legit. Only 2 issues though 1) at 1:20, to close to downtown Dallas and 2) it's massively urban which takes a ton of space.

There is a solid half dozen options off 75y though. I'd most love to get an off ramp that brings a new depots. Something like Cabela's, Target or Costco.

Making Texas 30 cities deep is a better attractive number than 29. Just like Cody, Northwest/North Wyoming needed something marked to valid travel there. I see Northern Texas the same. Gainesville, Sherman, Paris....one should go marked but that's just me. 3 scenic cities along US-82 is a longggg trip from Texarkana
to Gainesville. Paris has the least conflict with roads and other cities. It's also in between Texarkana and Sherman.

Paris works best connecting to I-30 and to Oklahoma. No telling when Arkansas comes to get Texarkana and US-259. Paris, I like for Northeast Texas if Texarkana isn't part of the Texas dlc.
User avatar
harishw8r
Posts: 4100
Joined: 14 Mar 2020 05:52
Location: Moon
Contact:

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#8436 Post by harishw8r » 08 Dec 2022 03:33

I would like to have 31 cities though, for personal reasons.

Haven’t explored Texas after completing the WoT event; switched to regular driving. Still a lot to explore and I like that about Texas - it feels like I have two new DLCs :D
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30161
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#8437 Post by flight50 » 08 Dec 2022 04:12

Well if we get something in South Texas, it's possible. It's been noted some findings are there too from the map editor.
Trakaplex
Posts: 833
Joined: 13 Jan 2021 23:24
Location: Plano, TX

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#8438 Post by Trakaplex » 08 Dec 2022 04:14

I really hope we get I-69C, because that's a pretty blatant miss. Maybe George West could be added in favor. They did south Texas pretty well. Only odd omission was Kingsville (which I actually spent a night irl), but I can see Riviera taking its place. It's like the Temple situation, a medium city too close to a bigger city.
Rule 2.3 - GDPR Violation
Shiva
Posts: 4973
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#8439 Post by Shiva » 08 Dec 2022 04:48

31 Texas cities?
Plausible, I think.
Paris, 30th.
Texarkana TX. 31st.

Regarding H5? for now, it is a bit wrong.
As in, US-75, not being at the bottom. But, this is a very early draft.
I-635 is at the bottom. US-75, above the service roads.
If it stays that way at release, then I suspect it could be due to game reasons.
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: 30161
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#8440 Post by flight50 » 08 Dec 2022 05:46

Texarkana isn’t the suspect I was going for. I’m speaking of South as in Presidio. I think it was SuchManor that first recognized Big Bend in the Map Editor. That would get us to every corner, nitch and cranny of Texas until Oklahoma and Arkansas comes.

Yeah the High 5 is wrong if you say US-75 is above the service roads. That would be the first inaccurate interchange since Albuquerque. I’d rather it skipped it is off like that. We wouldn’t be able to access it anyways for 635. We also could get 2 exist at that point. The High 5 is an interchange beast though. I bet before throwing in the towel, SCS will try everything they can for it. But at the end of the day, if it can’t fit...it Judy won’t fit.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Brothergun, Neoba, Ryley03d and 12 guests