Bridge terrain?

[Polocrunch]

I have been trying to do a "cityfight" scenario based in Paris (the scenario, not me!). My MAJOR problem was not info or maps, but bridges. Like most major cities, Paris is on a big old river, and so it has LOTS of bridges. I tried to create a "bridge" terrain, and i tried messing around with the coasts, and i tried using roads for the bridge. NOTHING works.
i know from maps of stalingrad that there is less of a problem because there are fewer bridges, and also you can ignore the river pretty much as the germans barely got there, and its enormous. But Paris needs the Seine and its bridges (which weren't blown up in any war i know of). So what can i do? does anyone know how to get around the problem (try editing a terrain - it only has "jurisdiction" over the diamond and the two upper triangles)?
Please help - Im very desperate - and i dont wanna blow up half the bridges in paris, and nor do i wanna swivel paris around to avoid the problem (it would look dumb).

 

[kobayashi]

You need to be more specific of what you are trying to do.

Why can't a bridge terrain work?

Do you need boats to travel on the rivers?

Does every race get to 'use' the bridges?

Do you want the bridges to be owned?

 

[insurgent]

You could name a terrain "The River Seine" and make it look like water. Then give it as high a movement rate as possible (127 IIRC). Then use that to make the Seine, but always keep it two terrain squares wide at least (for realism).
That will enable units to move across the river with one move per turn. That could be explained by the possibility of using boats to cross the river.
Give the terrain minimum defence rate to illustrate the vulnerability of units crossing in boats.
If you do all that, you can make a bridge terrain and there will be no mess with coasts or anything.

If you have a position on the river, where the river is one square wide, the units will be able to cross in two turns, three turns for two squares etc.

I just made that solution up, what do you think? Would it work? I'd say it would.

 

[Polocrunch]

When you have a bridge across water, it looks dumb if you have normal roads-over-land - i want it to look like a bridge.
i tried fattening up the roads, but you cant cover the entire square. then i tried making a terrain, but i still had the problem of coasts. also, the bridge is "wobbly" - it twists and turns very unrealistically, so i fiddled with the graphics of mountains, so the road went straight, but you had these coastlines in the middle of the river, looking very stupid.
i dont really mind about boats, but the seine is BIG - not a one-square affair, but about ten squares across (it really dominates central paris, which is where the action is based.
nice idea insurgent, but how would you overcome that graphics wise with the boats?
and remember - the seine is very deep and fast flowing, so walking across is impossible. what do i do once the "seine" has been destroyed, that could be tricky.

 

[Polocrunch]

oh, and everyone should be able to use the bridges - maybe u could "capture" a bridge.

 

[Polocrunch]

like in the "roman riots" scenario i used hills as roads - which works ok if u have a city like new york, where everything is in sensible blocks. but what if you have a city like in europe where the roads wind and twist? the problem is (like with bridges) that there is no way of linking the hills from directly above.

 

[Polocrunch]

this is wot i mean:

 

[Polocrunch]

this (see above) just doesnt happen with hills!

 

[kobayashi]

To get rid of the coastline on the bridges, just use barbarian ship units with zero movement which look like water and line the sides of the bridges. You may need more units to simulate the intersection of bridges with land. Was that the only problem?

I suppose you know there is no way to have boats go under bridges the way you intend to do it.

 

[insurgent]

I thought you could make a terrain for the Seine. But you wouldn't be able to hinder the movement of land units on it, so you could explain the fact that units march across the river by saying that they use boats. No need for a boat unit or anything.
That way you would have no coastlines and would just need another terrain for the bridges.

I like Kobayashi's idea. If you line the bridges with barbarian zero movement units, that cover the coastline graphics, and on the same time have a bridge terrain, it would look good. That way you could make the Seine with ocean squares, enabling only units in transports to sail across the Seine, and having bridges.
None of the stupid things with land units that can move across the river, and you having to explain it with them "swimming or sailing" across - as you would with my solution.

What do you think?

 

[Polocrunch]

Great!
I'll try it and post a reply asap.
thanx guys.

 

[Leonel]

I was kind of thinking if you did what the attached picture does. Just get the corner of the terrain to touch and use some railroad gif spots to make a bridge. They did it in a scenario of which name I have forgotten.

 

[Prometeus]

A close related thread spotted on Apolyton.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=65585

 

[kobayashi]

The river is supposed to be several tiles wide if you read the earlier posts. Besides the coastline is still apparent in the example shown.

 

[Polocrunch]

It still needs a LOT of work, but this is the idea:
The bridge on the left has a "river seine" barbarian to cover the coast. the bridge on the right doesnt, illustrating my original problem. ill have to fiddle about with the river seine thing for the part where the bridge meets the land. i still have to figure out what to do for where the actual road of the bridge meets the land.
hmmm.

 

[Polocrunch]

whoops, it didnt turn up...

 

[kobayashi]

I think you're much better off slanting the bridges like the one at the bottom rather than putting them in a up down direction.

 

[Archer 007]

Originally posted by kobayashi
I think you're much better off slanting the bridges like the one at the bottom rather than putting them in a up down direction.

Agreed.