Bridges, canals and other feats of geoengineering

s0nny80y

Emperor
Joined
Mar 16, 2011
Messages
1,125
Location
Ohio
I would like to build bridges such as the army corp of engineered bridges to connect the keys, in Beyond Earth; is this possible? Thanks!

Fighting Sea Monsters would make bridge building between the US equivalent of the Virgin Islands in space to French Guyana a hell of a trip.
 
Unlikely. CBE is built on Civ5 engine and there are some limitations (due to procedural generation the core terrain is static). Developers wanted conversion from sea to land for Dutch in Civ5, but weren't able to.
 
the civ5 civil war scenario does allow workers to build pontoon bridges across see spaces. I can't see why this cannot be applied in CBE.
 
I especcially like the canals idea. Sometimes it is just a small hex of land, that blocks a whole plethora of sea shortcuts. If otherwise suitable i then put a city there, but the option to build canals is something i long waited for in Civ. It would not even change terrain, but be a terrain improvement that allows ships to enter that land tile.

Heck, with the new tech tree system you could even put i on a leaf tech, so players would have to research it, before they could build it. Strictly speaking a canal is a world wonder, but how do you make a building have an effect on a single tile?
 
the civ5 civil war scenario does allow workers to build pontoon bridges across see spaces. I can't see why this cannot be applied in CBE.
I hope this comes back. Pontoon bridges don't work on the regular map scale-wise (since on a world map a hex represents a lot more area), but in Civ:BE? Bring on the miles long nano-engineered bridges! :D
 
the civ5 civil war scenario does allow workers to build pontoon bridges across see spaces. I can't see why this cannot be applied in CBE.

To more details. Civ5 engine doesn't allow changing core terrain, but it surely allows changing terrain features - applying improvements, removing forests, jungle, swamp, etc. The limitation is pure graphical thing, there are no gameplay limits.

Pontoon bridge is not a problem as it's a "feature". But canals requires changing core land, deelevate it.
 
Pontoon bridge is not a problem as it's a "feature". But canals requires changing core land, deelevate it.

Why don't just allow the canal tile improvement to be able to host sea units, like forts did i belive in Civ3 or cities did in every Civ. You won't build a canal a whole hex wide, impeding land travel. Our canals all have tons of land bridges over them and land units are stationed constantly at panama and suez. A canal is NOT a sea tile, as a ponton bridge (like the one connecting Denmark and Sweden) is NOT a land tile.

Spoiler :

Oeresund Bridge _______________________________ Suez Canal bridge

 
Why don't just allow the canal tile improvement to be able to host sea units, like forts did i belive in Civ3 or cities did in every Civ. You won't build a canal a whole hex wide, impeding land travel. Our canals all have tons of land bridges over them and land units are stationed constantly at panama and suez. A canal is NOT a sea tile, as a ponton bridge (like the one connecting Denmark and Sweden) is NOT a land tile.

As I said, there are no gameplay limitations. They surely could host sea units and so on. The only limitation is graphical - you could only attach some feature on top of basic land. You can't change the basic landscape. Since channels require deelevation (to reach the sea level), they can't be graphically implemented well.

All this applies unless developers did some significant work for the graphical engine specifically for CBE, which I found quite unlikely.
 
As I said, there are no gameplay limitations. They surely could host sea units and so on. The only limitation is graphical - you could only attach some feature on top of basic land. You can't change the basic landscape. Since channels require deelevation (to reach the sea level), they can't be graphically implemented well.

All this applies unless developers did some significant work for the graphical engine specifically for CBE, which I found quite unlikely.

They did fine for rivers... I think Canals could work similarly
 
No they didn't. Rivers are feature between tiles, you can't enter rivers.

They graphically worked at the transition from land to sea (wasn't that the objection)?
 
They graphically worked at the transition from land to sea (wasn't that the objection)?

No, no, no. You can't build rivers. That's the point - you can't CHANGE core terrain in Civ5 GRAPHIC engine.
 
The fundamental issue with rivers in Civilization has always been that they're features on the edges of hexes, and not in the hexes themselves. So rivers aren't navigable and never will be. Which is scale appropriate, because even the widest river on Earth isn't anywhere near one hex wide. But this makes the very concept of canals and pontoons irrelevant.

Bridges already exist in the game. You build one by build a road across a river.
 
The fundamental issue with rivers in Civilization has always been that they're features on the edges of hexes, and not in the hexes themselves. So rivers aren't navigable and never will be. Which is scale appropriate, because even the widest river on Earth isn't anywhere near one hex wide. But this makes the very concept of canals and pontoons irrelevant.

Bridges already exist in the game. You build one by build a road across a river.
CivIV and CivV has them on the edges of tiles... not sure about III... but I and II had them going through tiles.
 
The civilization 5 had a technology called engineering. WIth it, people were able to cross rivers without losing a whole turn if that's what you guys were talking about..
 
No, no, no. You can't build rivers. That's the point - you can't CHANGE core terrain in Civ5 GRAPHIC engine.

Well then instead of having it look like a river, have it be an 'elevated canal' overlay (sort of like an aqueduct..that overlays into the neighboring water tiles)
 
going round in circles here, major communication failure:

"can't haz canal because of deelevation (land->sea, i.e. dutch faction design)"
"no deelavation needed, it just terrain feature"
"deelevation is graphically (!) not possible, tile would look out of place"
"rivers don't look out of place just copy river grafics to use for canal tile improvement graphics"
"u can't enter rivers with naval units nub..."
"yes, lets talk unrelated things about rivers, nobody even asked, that will make sense of it all"
/facepalm

and gone downhill from there...

seriously guys, we can try to discuss and actually read what the others wrote, or we can flinge poo at each other, like the evolved apes that we are...
 
Communication was cut off from earth during final frontier in civilization 4 bts...
 
One of the main things I think is missing is 3d terrain from SMAC where different tiles had different elevation. Given that SMAC was released in 2000, I am really surprised that no Civ game since then has had 3d terrain and instead stuck to the needlessly shallow hill and mountain mechanic. In SMAC in particular this was really well implemented, as the amount of energy you collected depended on elevation, and artillery did more damage from higher up. And it looked good too. Overall, I am kind of disappointed the devs stuck with Civ 5 engine as it is far far from great one.
 
Top Bottom