What do you all look for in maps?

[fcdrifter13]

I am making a new/heavy edit, of the UMRV map that I will be bringing over to FS22 as well. So I would like some input on what you all look for when you choose a map. For me there are a few things I really like in a map.

The first thing is the map being 4x these days. I really enjoy the feeling of having to get items from far away locations, or moving product to those locations. The logistics play of a map really help draw me in.

Second is multiple sale points for all grains. I think this goes in with the first as well. Figuring out where to go for the best prices, this can also lead into holding for multiple days or seasons to get to the best price. This leads me to play differently after getting set up, basing my placeables on if I need more capacity for the season, or faster transport to get to the sale point.

Third is hard to explain. I like a map that is well thought out and makes the most use of its limited play space. I talk a lot about this in my map videos, using sight lines, blocking shortcuts, and other tactics to make the map feel bigger than it is. Layering a map can also make it feel larger as well.

Last is realism. I have taken a lot of time adjusting road widths, structures, and other items to make it feel as real as possible. The thing about realism though is that the real world is cluttered with stuff. More than the game can handle, so finding or making one that feels lush and full is hard.

So what all can you add to this list that I should look into.

Below is a video I made a couple of months ago showing my current progress.

[ValhallSN95]

For me, being limited to console, a map has to feel alive, traffic, pedestrians, towns, clutter, stuff like that, like people really live and work there. That's what draws me to a map mainly, next would be making the best use of the available space to make the map feel bigger than it really is.

[Kamiko]

Second is multiple sale points for all grains.

or... buy multi selling station ; )

I seek the atmosphere. I hope there will be more Polish styled villages maps in the future https://gfx.radiozet.pl/var/radiozetsg/ ... rticle.jpg

[blue_painted]

I find that the maps that are real places just work better than wholly imaginary or imaginary with some real-world features. I'm not entirely sure why, except that I usually play UK/Irish maps where there has been hundreds of years of civilisation (or something approaching civilisation ) and cultivation which produces a very organic field and road pattern.

My next big thing is maps that are "over-shedded" - my own term, which is for when a tiny little 5 ha farm has so many huge barns that could take two dozen tractors and half a dozen combines. I like maps with collisions on the hedges, but I can add them if they are missing, I like maps with seasonal foliage for the hedges and bushes, but again I can add if required. I still like maps where all the field defs have been added - because adding them is a pain!

TLDR; Attingham Park!

[ASOLANDRI]

TLDR; Attingham Park!

I find Attingham Park a great UK map, and Griffin, Indiana a great US map for consoles.

[Kamiko]

I find that the maps that are real places just work better than wholly imaginary or imaginary with some real-world features. I'm not entirely sure why, except that I usually play UK/Irish maps where there has been hundreds of years of civilisation (or something approaching civilisation ) and cultivation which produces a very organic field and road pattern.

I know what you mean!

just thinking about it reminded me the old catchy song about joy of buying black tractor (!) - https://youtu.be/eP5wNDeGqLk?t=42

[Eische]

Hmm, glad that you asked.
For me a map should give as much flexibility to the player as possible while keeping features making sense in terms of realism. For example UMRV looks great on first look. But a more detailed look reveals that there are certain issues with the map where it just feels incomplete/unfinished.
The default starting area is a good example. The fields are nicely shaped on the PDA map and give you the impressing that they are limited by the environment/topology. But in the game they are not. There are no topology features like terraced terrain, ditches or steep slopes to really justify the shape. They are just painted on a rather smooth surface.
Ditches in fields look really nice and natural on the PDA but again there are no ditches in the game. Just a smooth surface where the field is cut out to simulate a draining ditch. No weed/bushes just normal grass. Pretty sure that all players will just plough across the "ditch" and remove this feature to make field work easier.
If there would be an actual ditch, even just slightly lowered terrain with bushes/weeds/decofoliage it would make so much more sense to the player and he might be more inclined to leave the ditch and accept it. He might still roleplay and remove it via landscaping mode at some point, though.

And this is true for many 4K maps. They all have great field layout, nicely placed selling station/towns and overall structure. Points of interest are often very detailed and you really feel that there was a lot of work going into it. But in between fields or along roads they are just boring with default grass only.

On the other hand, field layout and non removable field seperating features like rocks, fences and buldings should go along each other. On a 4x map a small 4 acre field seperated by fences or rocks does not really makes sense other than looking realistic. It can not be joined with a neighboring field and might stay unworked for the whole time. Especially if it is kind of odd shaped. If same field would be seperated by a nice slender tree line, players can remove those trees later in the game and integrate this field into a neighboring one.

Griffin is a really nice map. It only has one big drawback in my opinion:
The town is quite tight. The side roads are very narrow and the placement of traffic signs make it nearly impossible to use trucks with longer trailers (pacesetter) without cutting down those signs.
But sure, the map is standard size and those larger trucks might not really be needed. I still really enjoy playing on this map. But it limits me to a certain extend.

[chedly_farms]

For me, it comes down to this...

Does it feel like am actually here on this map. Few maps have done that for me. Marwell, Osina, Griffin, and now I have gone back and recently rediscovered Bucks County, Pa. All these maps have real nice treelines and forests areas. Irregular shaped fields (for the most part, Griffin is squared off, but that is the midwest for you). Marwell and Osina have real nice tight starting farms, which I do miss on American maps. Most farms around me in real life are older built in the 50's - 60's dairy farms.

[fcdrifter13]

Hmm, glad that you asked.
For me a map should give as much flexibility to the player as possible while keeping features making sense in terms of realism. For example UMRV looks great on first look. But a more detailed look reveals that there are certain issues with the map where it just feels incomplete/unfinished.
The default starting area is a good example. The fields are nicely shaped on the PDA map and give you the impressing that they are limited by the environment/topology. But in the game they are not. There are no topology features like terraced terrain, ditches or steep slopes to really justify the shape. They are just painted on a rather smooth surface.
Ditches in fields look really nice and natural on the PDA but again there are no ditches in the game. Just a smooth surface where the field is cut out to simulate a draining ditch. No weed/bushes just normal grass. Pretty sure that all players will just plough across the "ditch" and remove this feature to make field work easier.
If there would be an actual ditch, even just slightly lowered terrain with bushes/weeds/decofoliage it would make so much more sense to the player and he might be more inclined to leave the ditch and accept it. He might still roleplay and remove it via landscaping mode at some point, though.

And this is true for many 4K maps. They all have great field layout, nicely placed selling station/towns and overall structure. Points of interest are often very detailed and you really feel that there was a lot of work going into it. But in between fields or along roads they are just boring with default grass only.

On the other hand, field layout and non removable field seperating features like rocks, fences and buldings should go along each other. On a 4x map a small 4 acre field seperated by fences or rocks does not really makes sense other than looking realistic. It can not be joined with a neighboring field and might stay unworked for the whole time. Especially if it is kind of odd shaped. If same field would be seperated by a nice slender tree line, players can remove those trees later in the game and integrate this field into a neighboring one.

Griffin is a really nice map. It only has one big drawback in my opinion:
The town is quite tight. The side roads are very narrow and the placement of traffic signs make it nearly impossible to use trucks with longer trailers (pacesetter) without cutting down those signs.
But sure, the map is standard size and those larger trucks might not really be needed. I still really enjoy playing on this map. But it limits me to a certain extend.

A lot of this makes sense for me as well. When I started playing UMRV I loved it, and saw the potential in it but it was just missing something. So that is why I went to work on it. I just looked at the date on that video, and apparently I have been messing around with it for about 5 months. It is starting to get a better feel to it but a long ways off. I think we both played two different versions, mine went to extremes with the ditches where they almost dug into the road, and having a sales route in the area that it is based off of I can tell you they are not that steep. I should have some updated pics of the map today at some point for some of the new farmlands and the like. I really want it to feel like the area that it is based on because it is really nice there.

[ASOLANDRI]

and now I have gone back and recently rediscovered Bucks County, Pa. All these maps have real nice treelines and forests areas. Irregular shaped fields (for the most part,

I might try Bucks County, PA once the TLX 3500 comes out. Although I don't really like how fast the AI cars drive (20 MPH). Might make a post to see if theres Bucks County GEO though.

[fcdrifter13]

I find that the maps that are real places just work better than wholly imaginary or imaginary with some real-world features. I'm not entirely sure why, except that I usually play UK/Irish maps where there has been hundreds of years of civilisation (or something approaching civilisation ) and cultivation which produces a very organic field and road pattern.

I know what you mean!

just thinking about it reminded me the old catchy song about joy of buying black tractor (!) - https://youtu.be/eP5wNDeGqLk?t=42

What did I just witness lol

[Kamoore65536]

For me none of the maps to date have actually immersed me in them.
1. I grew up in the 50's and 60's and all farms that had animals all had the animals on the main farm yard.
2. We never had new tractors and what equipment we did have was not high horsepower as there were no high horsepower tractors at that time.
2. Our biggest tractor was a 1965 Ford 6000 Commander of 65 horsepower, an Allis Chalmers WD 45 Diesel of indeterminate year and a VAC Case.
3. We had a pull type combine and pull type corn picker and we had a neighbor bale our hay and straw.

These are the things that i miss with almost all the maps.

[chedly_farms]

For me none of the maps to date have actually immersed me in them.
1. I grew up in the 50's and 60's and all farms that had animals all had the animals on the main farm yard.
2. We never had new tractors and what equipment we did have was not high horsepower as there were no high horsepower tractors at that time.
2. Our biggest tractor was a 1965 Ford 6000 Commander of 65 horsepower, an Allis Chalmers WD 45 Diesel of indeterminate year and a VAC Case.
3. We had a pull type combine and pull type corn picker and we had a neighbor bale our hay and straw.

These are the things that i miss with almost all the maps.

First off. I grew up in the 80's and 90's, and thought I was one of the older players, lol

Second, I know what you mean about old machines. I grew up watching Poppin Johnnies, John Deere 3010 narrow front, John Deere 4020, Oliver 770, John Deere 95 combine in my back yard. The neighbors farm I helped out/worked on had a John Deere 2010 and Farmall Cub.

Fourth, I can come over and bale hay on your map if you want, lol.

[DMZ Commander]

I find that the maps that are real places just work better than wholly imaginary or imaginary with some real-world features. I'm not entirely sure why, except that I usually play UK/Irish maps where there has been hundreds of years of civilisation (or something approaching civilisation ) and cultivation which produces a very organic field and road pattern.

I know what you mean!

just thinking about it reminded me the old catchy song about joy of buying black tractor (!) - https://youtu.be/eP5wNDeGqLk?t=42

What did I just witness lol

The latest giants stream

[ThatCanadianGuy]

UMRV is already one of my favorite maps (Flint Hills, Midwest Horizon & Medicine Creek being the others)

Elevation changes are extremely high on my list of must haves for a map. I hate maps that are dead flat or have little changes, they just get boring in a few hours. Along those lines realistic ditches! Maps with ditches add to map realism.
The more sell points the better, and the need to drive some distance to them.
Powerlines and signage appropriate for the region are also fairly high on the list of things that make a good map.

Realistic fields for the region and multiple options for the starting farm (Don't have a farmhouse/sleep trigger that you cannot sell)