Louisiana Discussion Thread

[flight50]

After Texas does not mean directly after Texas though. Some of us said before the Mississippi, some said once we get to the Mississippi. Kansas+Nebraska was mentioned. Both Dakota's as a bundle was mentioned and Louisiana+Arkansas was mentioned as long as I've been here, I have never seen everyone say bundles after Texas though. That's generalizing the whole community in which the whole hasn't said. Most people don't even bother ducussing bundles because don't really care.

[John007]

cydonianmystery, the states of the Great Plains are not small in area) They can still be released as each state and one supplement. But it is already difficult to release Louisiana as a separate addition since the area of the state is small. Therefore, Louisiana will have to be united. And it is better to combine Louisiana with Mississippi and Arkansas in one addition. This addition will add a vast territory of the lower Mississippi River to the game) By the way, I've come up with three additions here) Louisiana +Arkansas+Mississippi and call this addition "Lower Mississippi River". Alabama+Georgia+Florida and call this addition the "Heart of the South". Tennessee+North Carolina+South Carolina and call this addition "Southern Appalachians". These three additions will add the entire South of the USA to the game)

[cydonianmystery]

I respectfully disagree with the notion of Louisiana being too small. Going by the density of cities on par with what's seen in California and the PNW, SCS can fit all major LA cities and throw in a few scenery towns. And let's face it, that's going to be the new normal once we get past the Mississippi River. The density of the United States goes way up once we leave the western half. Combining states into bundles (it's not happening, this is SCS) won't change that new reality, and it's only going to get more extreme once we get past Appalachia. The Northeastern Megalopolis is going to be... interesting.

In fact, that's exactly why I'm arguing bundles won't happen (outside of New England). The higher density means were going to have more cities, more content, over a less spread out area. We're going to have states that have as many cities to explore as big Western states in less than a quarter of the size, and that's only going to get more dense as we go east.

If Louisiana gets shafted with a western or midwestern state's sense of density, and we only get the bare bones of BR/NOLA/Shreveport to match those, then sure throw it in with Arkansas or something. But if they do the state proper justice with all major cities plus scenery towns, then no. It's going to be standalone.

As for flight I have no interest in wasting time with semantical arguments.

[flight50]

^If you don't want to be corrected or educated, don't make such general statements saying everyone said x,y,z then. I'm not going to waste time either for people that don't want to listen. You have a good day though.

[John007]

cydonianmystery, by area, Louisiana is small))) Utah was considered by many to be small) So for sure no one will buy one Louisiana in addition) What is the dispute about in general))) I am in favor of each state being a separate addition to the game) However, it is unlikely that Louisiana will be bought at the price of the state of Utah even)

[Shiva]

Kentucky and Tennessee, are states that would have a few map grids/sectors that would be their own, if released separately.
Virginias etc, will not be released as separate states @cydonianmystery. Kentucky and Tennessee, might very well come as a pack.
Louisiana? either separate or in a pack with another state. Both are possible and plausible.

[John007]

Kentucky and Tennessee, are states that would have a few map grids/sectors that would be their own, if released separately.
Virginias etc, will not be released as separate states @cydonianmystery. Kentucky and Tennessee, might very well come as a pack.
Louisiana? either separate or in a pack with another state. Both are possible and plausible.

It is better to combine Tennessee with North and South Carolina in one addition. And call this addition "Southern Appalachians". It is necessary to include logic in the issue of the unification of the states in one supplement. Here, these three states are united by a geographic region. Louisiana is better united with Mississippi and Arkansas. And call this addition "The Lower Mississippi River". louisiana is too small to release as a separate supplement. And there is no logic to unite Tennessee with Kentucky, because the states are completely different culturally and geographically.

[Shiva]

John007, that does not really help regarding how many, or rather few, map sectors Tennessee would have.

Louisiana is much better in that regard.

[Oscar de Wyldde]

I would prefer to see Louisana DLC before Nebraska. I think a greater variation in scenery, industrial base and density of settlements would keep me interested ATS. Louisana is different enough to break up the monotonity of the 5 states north of Texas. A sequence of OK, KS, LA, NE, Arkansas, Missouri, South Dakota, Iowa, Mississippi, North Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois would be great.

[flight50]

A large number of people would rather get Louisiana before Nebraska. The one plus to the 5 states North of Texas is that they are more similar than not compared to Louisiana. So many of the assets made, can get reused. The best thing SCS can do for Louisiana is send a team back here to research it in person. Louisiana will require a lot of new assets so its a bit more demanding. The team might not be ready for that commitment considering the CEO states that the Great Lakes is the direct ATS will go.