Koen Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Bridgelayers were a bit of a hassle in 2.5, not functioning smoothly etc ...Has this maybe improved in 2.6 ?THX, K 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Volcano Posted November 6, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 6, 2011 There are signs with weight numbers on them that fit the classifications close enough. If a map designer wants to place them in front of each bridge, then he can do that. If you want to believe what the weight is by the sign then you can do that too. However, I recommend the military method: proof the bridge with one vehicle first. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabot_ready Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Question about AI behavior.Will a unit still attempt to cross a bridge it is not rated for? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 7, 2011 Members Share Posted November 7, 2011 Good question. I guess the beta testers will test just that in the coming week. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Volcano Posted November 7, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 7, 2011 Question about AI behavior.Will a unit still attempt to cross a bridge it is not rated for?Yes, for now I think so. But it doesn't really matter much because if the bridge doesn't support the weight, then nothing will happen other than it will drive on the first segment and it will collapse. This will be before the vehicle gets anywhere near the water (if the map maker placed the bridge properly), and will not be able to enter the next segment as it will be higher elevated than the first so the journey should end without anything other than a broken bridge. Then again, if the bridge is across the grand canyon and the first segment collapses and the tanks fall into the pit, who knows, it depends on the map. As with anything else, the owner of the unit has to use some judgement. Also, as the owner of a unit, it would probably be best to recon the bridges first (in the planning phase at least, and, if possible recon it in the execution phase) before plotting march orders across bridges. This is one more real world layer/consideration that we will have to worry about.It won't take long for everyone to get accustomed to how sturdy the bridge is by its appearance. Some bridges will be vital because they are very heavy duty and some will be less vital. Some will only be passable by light vehicles and can therefore be guarded by lighter units etc. It should all be very interesting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RENEGADE-623 Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 just a suggestion for scenerio designers, if you want to make your bridge to where it can only carry a certain number of vehicles, or a certain amount of weight, why not place ied's on it, then put a condition on it, say like if you want it to be able to have a max load of three tanks on it, put in area and do an if statement that if more than three tanks are on the bridge, then they explode, destroying the bridge. or maybe you want it where only trucks can cross it or only pcs or smaller, well, you catch the drift. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarUlf Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Question.Will it be possible for AI controlled Units to pass under the new bridges? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cata Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Also wondering if anyone is looking at over passes on main roads? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tacbat Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Question.Will it be possible for AI controlled Units to pass under the new bridges?IIRC, no. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnO Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 Yes: Air strikes can destroy bridges.Yes: large caliber HE rounds in direct fire more, or artillery fire, can destroy the wooden (light) bridge. Or you demolish it with an IED.Ahem, when you say air strikes what do you mean? Are you referring to helicopters or aircraft strikes? If so, how? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabot_ready Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Well they do have airstrikes as an option already. A pair of 500 lb bombs 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnO Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 Well they do have airstrikes as an option already. A pair of 500 lb bombs My bad, I forgot about that 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 (edited) Yes but make sure you make the impact area very small.The default (200 x 200?) is pretty big for a point tgt like a bridge. Edited November 8, 2011 by Gibsonm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Volcano Posted November 8, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 8, 2011 Actually, that is a good point (airstrikes). As a scenario designer, if you do not want the possibility of one side destroying all the bridges then airstrikes should not be given. The attacker would probably have airstrikes, and as such, he would be one who might want the bridges to be left intact, so the concern is not great there, but think twice about giving the defender airstrikes.Of course it might mean that some scenarios might need a slight adjustment here --with some scenarios needing airstrikes to be removed from one or more sides. Such is the side effect of progress... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabot_ready Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 or add bridge layers to the attackers ...."what you bombeth , I shall bridgeth" Tankviticus 3:12 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDevice Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Actually, that is a good point (airstrikes). As a scenario designer, if you do not want the possibility of one side destroying all the bridges then airstrikes should not be given. The attacker would probably have airstrikes, and as such, he would be one who might want the bridges to be left intact, so the concern is not great there, but think twice about giving the defender airstrikes. Yes: large caliber HE rounds in direct fire more, or artillery fire, can destroy the wooden (light) bridge. Or you demolish it with an IED. Reading above, it may be that ANY arty can knock out a light bridge. Are the heavy bridges immune to the effect? Or are air strikes capable of knocking out heavies, but not artillery or direct fires? That being the case, constructing a penalty for bridge destruction (per higher HQ's orders to NOT blow them) for a side might be necessary. Since I'm betting that the destruction isn't an event in the editor, we'll have to some up with some clever way to monitor that. Maybe a computer controlled civilian vehicle sitting next to the bridge? IIRC, enemy units won't fire on cars and such. Well, at least enemy AI units won't! :diable: The problem is that the condition doesn't care who destroys it, so if Red has a bridge to protect, and Blue goes and shoots their trigger sedan, that would suck. An interesting puzzle. Maybe someday we'll be able to tie "no fire" into the region logic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 8, 2011 Members Share Posted November 8, 2011 The bigger bridges cannot be (accidentally) destroyed by artillery fire. You will need an air strike. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnO Posted November 23, 2011 Author Share Posted November 23, 2011 Reading on another thread about railroad bridges and tanks crossing them.Curious on how a tank is allowed to cross on a railroad bridge? Isn’t the width of the tank in particular the NATO ones are wider than the bridge width. I in particular would remove all the railroad bridges because in rl tanks will not cross them, maybe the wheel vehicles and to some extent low weight track vehicles, but thats just me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishHussar Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Reading on another thread about railroad bridges and tanks crossing them.Curious on how a tank is allowed to cross on a railroad bridge? Isn’t the width of the tank in particular the NATO ones are wider than the bridge width. I in particular would remove all the railroad bridges because in rl tanks will not cross them, maybe the wheel vehicles and to some extent low weight track vehicles, but thats just me.What article or data do you have to back this up?Of course a tanks tracks are wider than the train tracks but the are many train lines that are able to carry trains which transport tanks and therefore are wide enough to accomodate a tank.Irish 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnO Posted November 23, 2011 Author Share Posted November 23, 2011 What article or data do you have to back this up?Of course a tanks tracks are wider than the train tracks but the are many train lines that are able to carry trains which transport tanks and therefore are wide enough to accomodate a tank.IrishI stand corrected, not from what you posted but just talked to a tanker here at work and I don't have articles or data to back this up and the question wasn't to be taken as the gospel choice. It was just a question that I thought that the tank width wouldn't allowed it to cross. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishHussar Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 IMHO I would be more concerned about the overhead cables and live tracks.Irish 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnO Posted November 23, 2011 Author Share Posted November 23, 2011 That's true, the Major who I talked to stated that it is not recommended to cross over rivers by railroad bridges, but he did say it can be done but last resort. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Your assuming that most of the rail network is electrified.In a lot of places the suburban rail network is the only place with wires, etc and the rest of the rural environment is dieso-electric.And of course only a few (one?) countries have live rails to worry about in their suburban networks.The bigger issue (IMHO) with a rail bride is that its very constrictive, you have to stay exactly on the route of the track, and of course as they are used to carrying trains, which stay on tracks, there are often no railings or other safety measures so if the driver stays from the one narrow path you can be “off“ the bridge before you know it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Volcano Posted November 23, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 23, 2011 It is quite simple really, we modeled a rail road bridge that at tank could fit on. Not all rail road bridges are just with the width of a track. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnO Posted December 21, 2011 Author Share Posted December 21, 2011 While I'm at work and spreading my germs (cold), and looking at the release notes.On page 17 fixed bug #1065, #686, and #1349and I quote "If, during the scenario, one side "steals" the bridge from the other side, the original's side icon will remain visible (so as to not give away the fact) but will from this point on be movable by the player"? and assuming by only movable by the player who "steals" the bridge How will this happen? And what I'm reading this is only for AVLB segments. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.