Montana Discussion Thread

[Trucker Nik]

@flight50 I know it's not interstate, but as he writes @Xaagon I meant it's important locally

[_Roger_]

I'm glad the first blog in Montana mentions US-2, it's just as important a road as I-10 or I-40 in Texas, we no longer have to worry about this path not being added, respectively speculate whether this path will be added or not

Sometimes I don't get where these comments come from. Why would we have to worry about it not being added or speculate about it? 1 second looking at the map of Montana gave me 2 options
1. Include US-2
2. Have no roads or cities in the northern 150 miles of Montana.

I don't see where you get any other possibility from, and it's pretty obvious they wouldn't go with option #2.

[flight50]

For me, there is no doubt US-2 makes the game. The doubt I have and many others is what will they do with US-2, West of Montana. Its a given that it will more than likely connect to Sandpoint. But will it go further West than that like it should? The Idaho team took shortcuts and that was one of the major ones. There is no reason why US-2 couldn't have come. I'll tell you why...they didn't want to bother with reworking anything. I never say SCS was lazy but in this case, I will point the finger at being lazy...not caring to even try. Idaho is the only dlc to ever not connect up a major road via road extensions from the previous dlc. No other state missed on this so badly since paid dlc's started. We didn't get US-50 to Sacramento either but that was base map. Its a new era for mapping now with paid dlc's and Idaho dropped the ball. Along with other misses, Idaho is my least favorite dlc for all its downsides. Visually, Idaho looks great though. I give them credit for looking good but that's not the entire picture. I don't think we got our money's worth with Idaho. I'm more content with Utah than Idaho even though Utah had a few misses. I didn't feel that with Wyoming and I am content that Montana will do what's right.

Looking at Montana and US-2 and how we could have gotten a link to Washington is mind blogging. I desperately hope the Montana team will link up US-2 to WA-20. US-2 to Spokane might have space issues but why can't US-2 take us to WA-20. What if I wanted to go from Kalispell to Coleville or Omak and I want to take the scenic route. It makes no sense to go Kalispell to Sandpoint to CDA, Spokane and then back North to Coleville. That makes no sense to me. So hopefully the Montana team is reading this wink wink @davido, lol and make that route possible between Washington and Montana. Fix what Idado did not do and save the day please. The downside is that Montana has to save the day for a lot already and US-2 should have been one less thing they'd have to do. There are roads left and right that has to tie up loose endless as is because of how Idaho is laid out in real life. ATS is even worse. I-90, US-93, I-15, US-89 and US-191. That is all in the Western 2/3's of the state. The only connection in the last 1/3 is WY-59 to MT-59. We won't see anything else until SD and ND release.

The greatest thing about SCS's concept of building their platforms is that they can be improved. It can all be fixed, tweaked, rebuilt in some fashion or another. The question will always remain....will they make changes. So far, nothing from Idaho or Utah has been fixed. Other dlc's have not need as much or already made some changes to better them. Hard to sell even old dlc's when negative issues shows its face to new buyers. Why would someone want to pay for a gap here or there. At least the Wyoming team cared to make changes and that made a huge difference to positive energy and I'm sure sales. All its takes is an open ear and implement change. Not that hard to do but you have to want to do it. I'm not sure if not fixing or not doing this or that is all on Pavel or not, but someone dropped the ball both Utah and Idaho. Are they still good dlc's, yes. But they could have been much better.

[fra_ba]

Idaho is the only dlc to ever not connect up a major road via road extensions from the previous dlc.

I don't get this part.
Regarding US-2 as you mentioned there are some scale issues; however, SR-20 from Colville to ID-WA border seems feasible

[TheAmir259]

He is referring to US-2 between Spokane and Sandpoint. That connection might be possible, if they are to rework Spokane slightly, as the angle that US-2 curves away to leave US-395 will actually hit another depot (Steeler & Home Store) within Spokane, be it directly (them being close to their path) or indirectly (the scenery greatly affected). Afterwards it doesn't appear to be contested, all the way into Sandpoint. They could even include that SR-20 as mentioned above, along that path, although the junction town of newport might have to be reduced greatly in scenic size for it to fit well.

All-in-all, it should be quite possible, to include the US-2 between Spokane and Sandpoint, in addition to SR-20 between Colville and Newport (meeting US-2), but a slight rework of Spokane will be necessary. Although it would not be easy, i trust the mapping skills of the mapping teams from SCS, they definitely can pull it off, unlike your average modmapper from the community. (Point-of-highlight: average, i know several outstanding mappers out there from the community so don't get me started)

[Tristman]

I agree with flight50 and fra_ba that US-2 all the way to Spokane is unnecessary, but US-2 to WA-20 is really a no-brainer. Northern Washington will be a very isolated place in the future if that road doesn’t appear.

Also, disagree with @flight50 that nothing has been fixed about Utah. The state launched with less roads than a lot of people hoped for. But UT-56 to Nevada was added later, and with Idaho, Colorado and Wyoming the road network was really fleshed out. There’s still the gap in the south sure, but otherwise the road network has improved quite a bit.

[angrybirdseller]

US-2 think be worth reworking Spokane making US-2 continuous as end point is Duluth Minnesota.

[flight50]

Also, disagree with @flight50 that nothing has been fixed about Utah. The state launched with less roads than a lot of people hoped for. But UT-56 to Nevada was added later, and with Idaho, Colorado and Wyoming the road network was really fleshed out. There’s still the gap in the south sure, but otherwise the road network has improved quite a bit.

You are good to disagree. But nothing that we have complained about day one has been adjusted. The gap still exist in the South. No fix for SLC mountains. No US-6 nor US-89 connections that parallel I-15. Check out the old proposed dds file for Utah to understand what I am referring to. The Salt Flats need so be adjusted. It's too short. Check out the post I made in the reworks thread on how to fix that part. viewtopic.php?p=1561760#p1561760

[Tristman]

But if you're talking specifically about the things the community has asked for, what other states have had such fixes? The only community thing that SCS picked up on afaik is the massive outcry about Yellowstone missing from Wyoming, and now in an upcoming update Cody and the US route connecting it to Yellowstone.

Thanks for the link to the Utah reworks thread btw, it has some interesting stuff in it.

[flight50]

In terms of paid dlc's, Idaho and Utah are the most criticized for things missing. We pay extra for them so people expect a bit more than base map. They are the two fastest produced so more shortcuts taken with them. Washington and Colorado are almost perfect. Misses there too but the road layout are more option friendly. Oregon got 140 in the South and 58. New Mexico has its misses but easily traveled. It just need to connect a few roads to help options. Nothing like Idaho nor Utah. At least that how I view it. Doesn't mean I'm right. But doesn't mean I'm wrong either.