Chronic Logic

I managed to build a bridge that folds nice, but when it starts unfolding, the pneumatic mechanism pushes back too fast, instead of gently releasing the tension...

I think, the mechanism should not work with a linear compression/expansion speed, it should have a gentle acceleration/deceleration phase (maybe including some damping effect)

Thx Gray.

Fully agree with Shark there..

In the meantime, I'll try to avoid vertical elements and keep things simple - usually it splits into a left and a right separation group then.

I tried to raise 2 decks vertically (they are hanging down on 3 pneum elements for examlpe), but I couldnt figure out how to create appropriate joints.

The problem is, I have to support the non moving decks on the sides but my joints (I know how to do basic joints) usually release the wrong connections at least on one side. Copy + mirror + paste the working side doesnt solve this problem  (I fear, the information which part of a joint will get released is not part of the construction process at all :(

I'd like to tell the program for every component that is part of a joint whether it belongs to the left or to the right part. (maybe it is useful to split a joint into more parts, imagine one part moving away to the left, one to the right and a third one is just pulled up)

Well, maybe it is just a quirk of the pre release version ;)

What about snow load? Let it snow and we get a measurable, increasing snow load...
(3m high wet snow at almost a ton per square meter is nothing that can be ignored :)

Yeah, a new version would be cool.

I have seen (and made) several suggestions here that should be really easy to implement.

CL: dont worry about game balance. Please, just do it and release it as a beta, I'm sure you will get a lot of feedback regarding game balance here.
(adding a new thread here should do it :)

Slowly increasing gravity probably can solve the initial settling problem. But it will not solve the problem of node breaking, since they will still be bend a lot when the bridge (slowly) drops down.

It would be ok if we can get flexible nodes (discussed elsewhere), too. But I would prefer 'real', adjustable pretension :)

I dont think pretension would make it easier, it is just one more option you would have. Some of my cables snap off already, they would be gone faster with added tension.

Dont forget: adding tension reduces the amount of ´real´ load the cable can hold!

Skyscrapers? Hmm... not an option after that WTC desaster, I'd say  :(  :(

(otherwise, I would now suggest a method how to test the stability :-/

And it would be a financial success now, I bet...
('Rebuild WTC! Test your skyscrapers.. Run a Boeing into it .. Can it survive the crash and the fire?')
Implementation wouldnt be a problem, fire stress would just degrade the links (steel faster, concrete slower and less effective)..

But no reasonable person will want to make profit that way, I guess.

I can see problems here, at least with tight turns and long trains. There is much more going on  between the cars then :)

Of course we would have to do banked turns for a clean run - would be cool ( but hard to implement and turning the program into a CAD thing as some stated :)

mendel: Nah, I meant the HUGE cost for mid air placement ( I suggested 80k for one.. that would be 160k for the usual symmetric pair) *plus* additional fee for the height.
Otherwise it would always be rather easy to use one or two anchors high up there and just run cables down to your deck..
At 160k/pair it probably wouldnt be cheaper to use several of them instead of building structure ;)

Pulsejet5: As I said, numbers may need tweaking. if you have to pay a HUGE price for mid-air anchors, you will think twice about buying that ;)

Maybe we could add some amount for putting them higher in the air, maybe add 10,000 for each unit above ground (or sea level?), too..

As I see it, the biggest problem with random maps probably is the placement of anchor points.

Solution: Let us add  (=construct for big money) our own anchor points.

Let's say an anchor point on normal surface 20,000,
under water 40,000, mid air 80,000 .. maybe numbers needs further adjustment for game balance..

Yep, mark/copy/paste with optional mirroring would be cool.
Moving a marked ´block´ (not only one node :) around without loosing the adjacent links/cables would be awesome!
Cannot count how often I wanted to raise or lower a big part of my bridge for 1 small unit ;)

... would come in handy when you start to evaluate the contest, too :)

What I'm thinking of:
Point the program to a directory, set preferences
(like number of cars, difficulty setting, number of runs,
number of tests - to make multiple tests for the same bridge, and MOST important: delay between start of sim and start of train - that way you dont have to have such unpredictable things in the rules like:'We will run the train a few seconds after..' - you could state exactly: 'We will test it with delays 3 and 5'),

and then the program will take every bridge found in that folder and test it with these settings, gathering infos into a text file (file name, bridge name, architect, cost, broken links, time for each of the train passes (for some benchmark guys  or  hehe... let the fastest train win :), total test time).

No graphics needed (maybe a progress report or whatever), should be able to be run in background..

I would like to see multiple tests per brigde, too:
test it with increasing load until it breaks on successive runs.. (maybe optional configuration via script file) so you can easy specify such runs:
easy 7 cars 2 runs
easy 9 cars 4 runs
medium 5 cars 2 runs
...

of course, here is another contest idea:
make a bridge that withstands the heaviest load
with a given budget :)  (on a tie, the cheaper bridge wins)

Chillum: With the 'Maximum' feature available, you can always test with less cars or on an easier level to find out what *will* go wrong with more load..
All but the most difficult things will get spotted this way..
(sure, if there is some 'bad vibration' somewhere, maybe you cannot find it without a very special load)

reverse time would be rather  difficult to implement, I guess ;)
and recording *everything* sounds infeasible, too :(

Maybe we can have an automatic stop with highlighted link when the program decides it will break as an option.
Should be easy to implement.. let's call it AUTOPAUSE :)

BTW: why is there a limit of 10 cars? I would like to test with more :)   or something like extra high and ultra high?

(Edited by Calis at 5:11 am on Oct. 21, 2001)