Chronic Logic

Yes, yes, I know there are other Roller Coaster products out there. But you did such a good job that I believe that a Roller Coaster building program would be excellent.

Following Pontifex...the train would instead become a roller coaster...and the bridge, the track.

Construction would have all the current attributes, along with the potential for failing under excessive gravitational forces caused by the weight of the coaster, it's speed etc.

It doesn't matter if the track is linear either, as some of today's RCs are just end to end and not looped.

Sound ideas, I think I can add another. Tunnels.

Building through ground which cannot be scaled by a bridge. This would involve using materials such as those currently used in order to prevent the tunnel collapsing, based on the weight of ground above it.

I think that the combination of bridges and tunnelling would make an interesting challenge.

No problems with alt-tabbing here....can even run ICQ in background and alt-tab when message comes in. Poss. check your temp/swapfiles...defrag too...

Have a few ideas for you on this one....

If you're running a GeForce... Get the Detonator XP drivers from Nvidia. XP will warn you that drivers are NOT certified....ignore it, they work just fine.

Also....using a SoundBlaster Live with the 'fixed' way of installing the 2000 drivers into XP will cause you untold problems. If you have one, wait for the official release mid-late October.

Remember that XP has a system restore function....use it always to create a restore point before loading drivers.

Finally, make sure your OS is a released version and not a Beta. Helpful info on XP configuration may be found at www.tweakXP.com

Hope you get it sorted....

Don't forget, in real life, load is distributed on bridges. If I am getting the idea of your ascii image, it seems that the bottom row is supporting 3 times it's own weight with compression going straight down.

If the top layer width is < bottom, weight becomes evenly distributed. Look at the Eiffel Tower for a better explanation of what I'm trying to say.

Hope I understood what you meant....sorry if I haven't.

regds....Bob |

For all of you that need some inspiration, check out the following excellent site....

http://www.brantacan.co.uk/bridges.htm

In my humble experiments, I found that creating A-FRAMES in the complex mode yields a stronger bridge support.

This is no surprise, as an 'A' is basically a triangular construction. Look at most metal bridges and you will find that it is made almost entirely of triangles.

Don't forget that Pontifex allows you to create a triangular support in the third dimension as well as the side on view.

(Hint) Use shift and arrow keys to rotate your view.

and don't forget http://www.brantacan.co.uk/bridges.htm" target="_blank">http://www.brantacan.co.uk/bridges.htm some great info here with examples and all original content.

Hmmm, lots of discussion on allowing the bridge to settle in this discussion.

I think that minimum settle time is ok, as you really wouldn't expect to place a real bridge and have it flap about a bit before considering it finished.

As a perfect example, look at the guys who designed the Millenium footbridge in London, UK. It never settled! LOL. Guess they should have left the design for all us Pontifex users, we probably would have made it on a lower budget too!:wink:

Congrats Chroniclogic Team on running the first contest. Good choice of level I thought for the first one. Allows many different styles to be adopted.

I've made my submission, and look forward to the results, if only to see the way others tackled it.

Looking forward to the next one already....

Regards to all in the forums, this really is beginning to become a lively, and friendly community.

Just wanted to add my congrats to Calis....nice work. Contest was a blast, looking forward to the next one.....

regds to all :biggrin:

Don't know whether I'm right on this one, maybe CL can confirm. In a way the 3 dimensional box sections simulate another force which is very important in bridge building, aside from tension and compression. TORSION.

Torsion is the twisting force, which can be more devastating than any other if you happen to get it wrong.

Torsion is also quite difficult to calculate and would probably add heavily to CPU usage during the game, so I'm guessing that this is a simplified version. Either way, I like the system.....it's enough of a challenge without being tedious IMHO.

(Edited by panther at 9:31 am on Oct. 25, 2001)

Yeah I'd love to see a retail packaged version eventually, and I really have faith that the CL team have the aptitude and commitment to do it if they ever feel they want to.

Let's face it, with some of the old weary titles being done again and again at 30 quid or more, a finely polished and packaged version of Pontifex would be bound to attract attention.

Sid Meir (of Tycoon series fame) is probably watching Pontifex with interest as we speak in the forums - LOL!

Good luck CL........

ROFL - I seem to have started a 'What did Steve Meier actually write then?' thread.....

:cheesy:

I think it's important to note that features such as unlikely anchor points boost the appeal of Pontifex.

Many designs from land anchor to another land anchor, ultimately end up very similar. Adding the mid-air anchor points is not just fun, but extends the possibilities for bridge design by a massive amount.

More mid-air points please.....makes for a great alternative to land anchors.

Regds to all....