Bridges

How about Force Field bridges...?

They would cost a continuous amount of energy to keep running and would turn off if your energy storage ran out. Also you could turn them off when you don't need them.

To build them, just build the four receivers in each corner, with maybe a main activator tower of to the side, like below:

<1===2>
=====
=====
=====
<3===4>
AT

<1,2>,<3,4> equal Receivers
= equal Bridge Space
AT equal Activator Tower

That way you could build the bridge to the shape, size and gradient you want, with a maximum limit of course. The size would depend on how much energy the bridge requires to keep active.

If the receivers and tower where treated as linked entities instead of one building, then it would also meant that you would need to get an engi to both sides of the bridge to build the receivers before it could be activated.

Anyways, what do you guys think....? To complicated..?

What happens if the enemy crosses the force field? Or if a unit is on a bridge that shuts down? :cry:

Well, if asteroids can "fall" on planets, why can't a unit(s) fall off a bridge that deactivates and explode at the bottom of said fall, or drown...?

If the enemy trys to use you bridge...I would wait until its full before deactivating it, hehe

@nayzablade you beat me too it, as soon as i saw this thread i wanted to suggest energy field bridges.

Just picturing all the enemies tanks driving along, and then having the bridge switch off, would be fun to see them all smash against the ground/melt in the lava/drown in the sea.

However there is only one issue with that, in that I can see how this could easily be exploited.

e.g. If you where to strategically position your base beneath a layered set of bridges, then you have in effect recreated shielding in this game, and I didn't think shields where on the cards this time around.

As far as I'm aware the best "bridge" that was modded into supcom was a teleporter at each end of a landbridge so ships could "go under" it.

If you have bridges that you can raise for ships I would be really happy with that, especially so if they will do it automagically.

Multiple bridge types would make for some cool varied gameplay. Building bridges from straight mass may make them more stable but take longer to constuct. Energy bridges are quick to deploy, but destroying their pylons or the unit that summons the bridge make for easy dismantling.

The whole ice as a bridge thing would be really awesome too, making it able to be destroyed, but either refrozen by itself in polar climates or by specific units with a refrigeration field (and in warmer climates these would only be temporary).

Very interesting things would be possible, even if these are just modded in eventually (though official support is always better).

If we can have both bridges and ship troop cariers in a game then I would go with both. However if we were to have only one of these I would go with ship troop cariers. For you can not assult an island of a camper with a bridge, because he will destroy it during construction or deployment. Elsewhere transports can be used during assult. Additionaly there where no bridges in TA, while ship troop carriers were in the game.

Arent all these cool but really micro bridges a little too micro :?:

Well, since the planet itself is done as a 3d model, and so are traversable terrain features (like the rocky plateaus), and since all of those can be removed and modified in-play by (eg) asteroids, it seems to me bridges would be perfectly doable in the engine. Ramps segments and surface segments automatically stitched together, just drag a line between two points.