Elevation changes, more materials, and tunnels!!!

[pulsejet5]

there is a string about skyscrapersin the forum and
there is one at the bridge biulder site however this topic was not about skyscrapers
I also thinkk it would be a really cool feature in a sequal to be able to start a company and bid for construction jobs. (:

[phelix]

I think that would be the next logical step.

Also using the same engine to make skyscrapers instead of bridges with minimum floors and must survive frieght elevator passages...

Just my 2 cents!!!

And thanks for a great product!!!!

[hybris6]

Yeah it would be cool to build skyscrapers http://www.pontifex2.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'> And stress test them...

Also it would be fun with more materials and maby a campaign where you compete with computer players to build the cheapest bridges or the best looking working bridges or that you can take with you the money you saved to the next level... Theres no end to the possibilities ;)

[mjohn]

I like the Tunnel idea. Of course the 'gap' would need to be quite large and new materials added (Tunnel sections) but I believe the real fun would be supporting the tunnel sections over rugged underwater terrain.

This could be mega complex as tunnel sections would crumple under much less stress.

[mendel]

On the bridgebuilder-game.com forum in the Offtopic channel there's a thread about the WTC.... http://www.forum.bridgebuilder-game.com/topic.cgi?forum=4&topic=16

Detail:" target="_blank">http://www.forum.bridgebuilder-game.com/topic.c....Detail: the impact of the crash was no bigger than the load WTC was subjected to in high winds
Detail: WTC lost about 25% of vertical supports where the plane hit (don't know which tower, but should be roughly the same for each). It was designed to accomodate loss of 50%.
Detail: with only ordinary stuff burning (what was in the building), it should have stood up for hours - I guess that's what the firefighters expected. Kerosine burns very hot, and there were tons of it.
Detail: 1968 was a collapse of a tower that had the "domino" effect seen here as well. (When one of the upper floors crashes down, the load on the floor "catching" it is too great.) UK and other countries had building code in place that mandated design to consider this by 1972; the US took a lot longer.

If you want to test buildings for every imaginable disaster, why not include terrorist smuggling a nuke in there or a ballistic missile hit? You can't make evrything 100% safe unless you build a secret bunker,and even then there's the human element...

My heart goes out to victims of war and terrorists everywhere - be it in the U.S. or sponsored by the U.S. http://www.pontifex2.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':('>

hybris6, I like that campaign idea. You could be in charge of a construction company - at first you only have access to one or two low-tech materials (eg. wood). You get a budget for each construction (not just bridges, but buildings, pylons etc.) and the money that's left over you can plough into research to get access to more materials, or into other areas of the business maybe.

Definately has potential!

[Racazip]

Skyscrapers....

Drywall, pipes, glass, steel beams. *drool*

[Calis]

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.