Bridges

[Randall172]

I  need to ask why you wish to have them destructible?

HiTech

it could add an extra layer of immersion, but now that I think about there's no gameplay reason.

with the beta is the graphics card going to be the biggest bottleneck, and will there be 4k textures?

[Easyscor]

it could add an extra layer of immersion, but now that I think about there's no gameplay reason.

with the beta is the graphics card going to be the biggest bottleneck, and will there be 4k textures?

There's no game play reason? (For "destructible bridges")
I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree more!
I've been there. The bridge goes down and everyone leaves their GVs and goes to their next ride. The guys that took out the bridge are obviously laughing about the gnashing of teeth and whines of the GV opposition but hey, someone was silly enough not to see what would happen. That avenue of attack is dead and even if it eventually comes back, the fight has moved around the bottleneck! Usually to another side of the map!
If the attacker has done it right, he returns in time to cross the rebuilt bridge unopposed, and still laughing.
No thank you. I come for the fight. If you want to fight shacks instead of other players, there's an off-line version of the game available to you.

[Bizman]

I agree with Easyscor.

If a destructive bridge would disable the spawn point for a limited time, or at least push it further away,  it would add one strategic aspect in capturing fields just like taking the radar or VH out of business. The downtime should be relatively short, though, and the bridge should up similarly to the acks when the field is captured. I.E. the new owner should build it back immediately.

Then again, if destroying your own bridges were possible, disabling or moving the enemy's spawn point for a moment would be a nice defensive move especially in cases where "we" have just captured a small base surrounded with enemy spawn points.

[Greebo]

Bridges can already be incorporated into any special events terrain at the whim of the map designer. For MA terrains however only HTC-approved objects can be put in and there is not yet a separate bridge object that can be used, just those that are part of a base or a strat.

I've been told a separate bridge object for MA terrains is on HTC's list of things to do and when/if it arrives I will be putting some into CraterMA. This should create some nice choke points away from the spawn areas and make for more realistic tank battles. The bridges will not be destroyable for the reasons given above.

[NatCigg]

can the bridge be hard?  maybe it need direct hit from a bomb, or cant get get destroyed from the ground without 10 minutes of effort.  comon man all that archival footage showing commanders desperately trying to destroy a bridge.    what fun!

 

sure, fighting a timid player is fun, but bombing a bridge is my job! 

[Greebo]

Part of AH's future strat road and rail system is supposed to be a river that can be laid down by the map designer. Currently the only way to create a river is by using narrow strips of ocean, but this doesn't work too well in AH3 as the river can't be made very narrow without looking rubbish from altitude.

Now if these new rivers could be made as narrow as 30 feet then they could be bridged by a bridge-laying tank like a Churchill AVRE. A player-laid bridge would be fair game to be destroyed by other players and it would be a great reason to include the Churchill tank in the game.

[hitech]

I've been told a separate bridge object for MA terrains is on HTC's list of things to do and when/if it arrives I will be putting some into CraterMA. This should create some nice choke points away from the spawn areas and make for more realistic tank battles. The bridges will not be destroyable for the reasons given above.

They have been already released a few versions ago.

HiTech

[Randall172]

Part of AH's future strat road and rail system is supposed to be a river that can be laid down by the map designer. Currently the only way to create a river is by using narrow strips of ocean, but this doesn't work too well in AH3 as the river can't be made very narrow without looking rubbish from altitude.

Now if these new rivers could be made as narrow as 30 feet then they could be bridged by a bridge-laying tank like a Churchill AVRE. A player-laid bridge would be fair game to be destroyed by other players and it would be a great reason to include the Churchill tank in the game.

or a short route to town, and a long route with the short route requiring a bridge that could be destroyed by attackers.

[Greebo]

They have been already released a few versions ago.

HiTech

Thanks, must have missed that. I'll check it out when I get home.

[Toad]

If they simply can be destroyed it would instantly end the ground battle.

HiTech

Kinda like sinking the CV ends the really good air battles. 

[Greebo]

Having checked the TE's full list of objects I'm assuming the MA-allowable bridges are the ones with river banks attached to each end, bridge0a, 1a, 1b and 2a. If so it might be an idea to include these in the list of objects that display when "Show all shapes" is left unchecked.

I had a quick look in likely threads but was unable to see any discussion on these bridge objects and I have a couple of questions.

What Object Type should these bridges be set to?

Otherwise I guess they should be set to country owned with "Can collide" and "Set to terrain alt" both checked.

[hitech]

Having checked the TE's full list of objects I'm assuming the MA-allowable bridges are the ones with river banks attached to each end, bridge0a, 1a, 1b and 2a. If so it might be an idea to include these in the list of objects that display when "Show all shapes" is left unchecked.

I had a quick look in likely threads but was unable to see any discussion on these bridge objects and I have a couple of questions.

What Object Type should these bridges be set to?

Otherwise I guess they should be set to country owned with "Can collide" and "Set to terrain alt" both checked.

Yes on can collide, object type depends on if you wish them able to be destroyed by both sides one side or no sides.
Odds are you will not set to terrain alt, because the bridges are made to be able to be used on terrain with different slopes. You will hide a lot of the bridge below ground.

Barrier = can not be damaged.
Structure = both sides can damage
Void = enemy can damage.

[Nosara]

A bridge would make a grand battle. Make it capturable like a base with spawn point set up like bases. Except have to get troops to both side of the bridgehead ie twenty troops in to take, ten per side of the bridge.
You have made such pretty rivers now we need to fight for a crossing.
PS
PT spawns in river points near bridges.

[Greebo]

I had a go at placing bridges in CraterMA but it didn't really work out. My idea was to bridge one of the very narrow strips of ocean in the terrain I have serving as rivers. The bridges aren't really long enough for this but I managed to get a couple placed so they looked OK in the TE. To do this I had to set them to -40 feet altitude so that the bridges and their linked hill sections sat at a reasonable-looking height above the water and land. The problem is that in the game the bridge object was sitting far higher than I'd placed it in the TE, the base of the hill was even floating clear of the ground. After loading up the TE again I worked out that while the TE saves positive alts for the bridges it resets any minus altitude to 0 feet.

I think these bridges are designed for crossing the future strat rivers, rather than to cross strips of ocean like I attempted to do. So I'll wait until the strat rivers come out and then have another play with the bridges then.

[hitech]

I had a go at placing bridges in CraterMA but it didn't really work out. My idea was to bridge one of the very narrow strips of ocean in the terrain I have serving as rivers. The bridges aren't really long enough for this but I managed to get a couple placed so they looked OK in the TE. To do this I had to set them to -40 feet altitude so that the bridges and their linked hill sections sat at a reasonable-looking height above the water and land. The problem is that in the game the bridge object was sitting far higher than I'd placed it in the TE, the base of the hill was even floating clear of the ground. After loading up the TE again I worked out that while the TE saves positive alts for the bridges it resets any minus altitude to 0 feet.

I think these bridges are designed for crossing the future strat rivers, rather than to cross strips of ocean like I attempted to do. So I'll wait until the strat rivers come out and then have another play with the bridges then.

Ill fix the less then 0 issue.

HiTech