Poll: Which area should SCS add to ETS2 next?

[dahaka]

It will still feel weird to have more density in a forest covered area than what we have in the Benelux. I mean it's obvious that Gällivare and Kiruna will be included, but Kittelfjäll with its whopping 69 residents? While we don't have Eindhoven and Antwerpen in the game? It will sure feel weird to me. Also, I wouldn't expect too much, even the awesome wind farm I drove to IRL and suggested to SCS to include near Pamplona wasn't added, I'm not sure they will consider adding Swedish ski resorts. IF however they do, I do have some Italian and French campsites to suggest, I've transported camping equipment there IRL.

[Aziz]

While Finland could go up to Oulu or thereabouts, add some of Russia just east from there and call it Land of the Lakes dlc, I don't think Norway/Sweden would go much further north than Trondheim. Or at least not in a single expansion. Larger settlements basically end there, and there's also problem with roads, there aren't many, at least those that go across the border. And then we'd still be dealing with huge chunks of nothing, and I guess nobody wants to see gaps instead of roads on the map. There are many differences between this and every other dlc that the team would have to work with to make something worth buying and playing. If they keep the trend of adding at least 30 locations, most of them will either be tiny, or the (sparse) road network will extend very far north.

[Shiva]

209 km gap between https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Junkerd ... 434615!3e0
Is it not good if not every town/city next to each other?

Aziz, not north of Trondheim? If so, then there is no need to have any Scandinavian/Fennoscandian expansion.
Ehh, who wants fjord, forest and mountainroads anyway?
Well, I do. And I wish to driver in Greece too. Western Balkans, IBeria, the DLC that sadly got postponed, etc.

[guilhem1]

I voted for scandinavia since the dlc came out I always dream of seeing scandinavia fully built and with today's quality of development it makes me want to see it more and more
but it seems to me that they had said that they wanted to rebuild the dlc already present before wanting to enlarge this part of the map but I hope they have changed their mind.

[Evil_Jason]

A rework of Scandinavia DLC could take quite some time.

Austria took them one year to do and Germany was done in 3 parts.

[Some newbie driver]

Size of populations doesn't matter so much if there's a big industrial activity that justify trucks to go that place; either ETS2 and ATS have several examples of this. For example, everybody expected Pau to be there but instead they added that small town of Lacq that nobody thought about. Why? Because it has the biggest refinery in all France, that it's way more relevant for trucking than a small-sized city (which downtown we would not reach anyway) with regular companies that we could find anywhere else in the game map.

So, big quarry or forestry industrial plants, or maritime harbors in northern Scandinavia can be perfect candidates no matter the size of the normal towns that could be near. For example. Also, we have to consider that SCS would want some maps DLC to be "themed" differently. So far they had made maps more or less balanced "the same" (I know I know, the too towns/too highways complains on RttBS/Iberia); but that has been because so far they had mapped mostly only "conventional" highly density urbanized European zones. They could decide to include newer code features and let those less populated zones to feature other kind of layouts liked to them. I'm thinking for example on develop more the dirty-path local-hauling thing.

And in the case of Greece, if the game doesn't change how it's mapped, 100% agree with dahaka in what could be the layout. If SCS ever changes the game to embed differently scaled maps all in one (creating seamless junction points in the map); then they could map whatever they want. Either from Greece islands either from any other place we miss all over the map. But that's a completely hypothetical possibility that I consider; not anything anybody at SCS has talked about.

Regards

[justgettingold]

Would be nice to not have to drive from Latvia to east Romania through Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Hungary. Instead, go in a more or less straight line south. That's my choice right now.

Well I think this is how trucks are actually driving now in reality... so little hope for the future of this region in ETS even if we discard political concerns.

[Some newbie driver]

Politics apart... do really trucks take the straight line in that kind of trips?

Even if there's less km involved, there's also a lot of borders to cross with their customs procedures, loss of time in paperwork, time restrictions in some places.... What's better for those truckers in real world? Do less km but face all that bureaucracy or keep driving for longer inside EU countries? Just curiosity

[alluke]

Norway - Sweden - Finland - No Russia.

[AlexxxF1]

@Some newbie driver in real world there are too many criteria that managers take into account when paving the way for a truck to carry cargo.
some of them... let's see :

* toll roads - in some countries they are very cheap, in others very expensive.

* fuel cost - sometimes it’s more profitable to travel in the country where the fuel is cheaper to refuel there, even if the travel distance increases slightly.
(truck fuel tank 1500 liters -for example if you pass Lithuania and refuel there for 2 euros, you spend 3000 euro. if you pass Belarus, you can fill up for 0.8 euros and spend only 1200 euro.
(that is, from every trip from every truck you will have 1800 euro left in your pocket, which will be yours and which you can spend somewhere else - for example, if a company owns 1000 trucks, then the amount saved on cheap fuel or on each trip will be huge. 1 million 800 thousand euro)
that is, by driving from Lithuania or Latvia to Romania through Belarus, you can spend less money on toll roads, on cheaper fuel, and win back the time spent crossing the border by simply driving on the faster and wider roads of Belarus and Ukraine. not to mention that this route will be shorter, even narrow roads in Belarus and Ukraine, rarely pass through settlements, and most importantly, there is a very high speed limitation - 60 km/h in cities and 80-90 km/h outside the city for trucks, and even over speed <10 km/h, you will not be fined. in any city in any city of Belarus or Ukraine you can drive 69 km/h, in any city in EU you can only drive a max 50 km/h.

* secondary road or autobahn - for 40t a secondary road vs autobahn is always -
- a big loss of fuel.
- a big loss of truck resource (brakes, tires, engine).
- a big loss of time (you also need to take into account that 1 driver can drive a maximum of 9-10 hours in 24 hours).

* many cargoes allow you to pass the border very very quickly and out of turn (oversized, perishable, dangerous or explosive).
(although even with the most ordinary cargo, crossing the border on some days can take only a maximum of 3 hours).

in real life there are a lot of factors that need to be taken into account, which bring benefits and which are not visible or not noticeable at first glance, not immediately noticeable.
(so a trip from Lithuania or Latvia to Romania through Belarus and Ukraine is not only 500-700 km shorter (and all the benefits that come with it), but also brings a bunch of other nice profit in real world).