Chronic Logic

"innocent until proven guilty" works only if the bridges are published; this means it's not a good idea for a contest (unless you want to demand your awards back - and remember, this could be the result of a simple oversight), but could work well for a records table.
Obviously dirty bridges are much easier to handle :-)

Placing a horizontal bar at the top end of the grid on a default level takes ten seconds to fall on my machine. Call this machine- and bridge-specific time 1 (one) BF. So one could announce that the bridge would be tested at 0 BF (=TT), 1 BF, 2 BF etc.
The standard bar to use is a 10m horizontal light steel bar, and the cost of 趚 is subtracted from the budget.

500 frames = 30 seconds at normal on a very fast system

"Clean" means for me, show the bridge to an architect, say "build me this" and not get laughed at - I think that was the rationale behind BB clean, as well.

This means the train has to stay on the tracks at all times,  must not get "wet", and of course the bridge must not change in any way through use, sustaining a potentially infinite number of runs. All this on "hard".

For those of us who find that "reality" is no fun, that's what dirty records are for... anything goes as long as the level completes at least sometimes :-)

I think so far Gray and I are in agreement now (finally!), except for one thing:

Gray thinks falling bridges are further away from reality than inclined deck ones.

I say, they're just as far away as anchors in the sky. Who said it was just a matter of presentation to imagine something that holds them up? I contend there's an invisible crane holding that up, and a clumsy crane operator drops it into place too forcefully....
Especially steel truss bridges are often pre-constructed, I think - I've seen this on a railway bridge in my home town. Ok , that was shifted sideways onto the final site, not dropped from above, but still...

Klei, thanks for showing that compressed cable can be used for "clean" constructions (except that it's touching the ground in both cases); I knew my example soon twists and falls, but it showed the compressive stress very well. On your go, the stress is more distributed, and the cables don't get as red(dish) as they do on mine.
Yours cushions the fall even better than mine does; if one could just come up with a version that doesn't need the ground anchors, that would make dropping things much easier...

My monster post deserved a monster reply. Argh. Getting out the scissors...

Re:12
Mendel wrote: A bridge that fails for a train that's lighter than specified
It has been reported somewhere on this forum that this happened at least once. I believe the engine is weaker on those light trains, so speed does not differ much, but I may be wrong.
Would I test every record bridge with every lighter train?
I might, and if this happened more often, I'd get a feel what kinds of bridges might show that behaviour.

Re:13
My drawbridge is breaking some links, and it doesn't work with a lighter train, I think, but other than that, it's clean... :-)
Here's a textbook example of what this rule forbids:
http://pontifex.mendelsohn.de/forum/compcabl.pxb" target="_blank">http://pontifex.mendelsohn.de/forum/compcabl.gif" border="0">

Gray wrote: Being able to build inclined decks is a feature. It's intended by CL.
So how am I to know which feature is intended and which is not? I think making drop-in bridges was intended.

I see, you would easily sacrifice all existing records for correctness' sake, you don't hold any of them yourself anyway
I have never advocated throwing them away, but with new record rules adopted, they'd have mere historic value. (Hey, didn't you ever want to be a historic figure?)

It basically kills 1/2 of the fun of complex mode. Do you really want to put all clean records with an inclined deck in the same category as those with 100 broken links? Does anyone really want more categories between the classic two?
All the "clean" rules kill some fun for someone somewhere. If you follow this principle through, you ought to take a vote: "Which rules would be fun?", put those that get 50%+ in a package, and put that package to the vote again, if you get 50%+ on the package, you have your "league" set up.
I want to put all bridges with 0 broken links in one category.
I also want more categories - we've discussed this http://www.bridgebuilder-game.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=7&topic=5" target="_blank">before.

Re:IMO, No. 2, 4, (and 14+15) should be allowed for certain levels
If I understand you right, if every shore has a pair of anchors on the ground you can attach deck to, centered on the train path, no exceptions are allowed except 14+15 which you don't hold valid anyway? And if the anchors allow building of level deck between them, even 14+15 could be in effect, provided the train can get from these anchors to the borders of the level?

Gray wrote: As long as it's bugged (even partially), it shouldn't be used.
Simple, clear, agreed. That doesn't apply to the deck cheat, though, because that "could" be a feature. Hmmm, is building deck with heavy steel clean?

NO NO NO CL must not fix the "slanting deck" at any time! I wil refuse to upgrade my pontifex if they do! So there!

Slanting deck is fun and should be allowed, though it would probably make an architect laugh....

I can't decide, I will abstain from voting.

Are "dropping" bridges clean? If they manage to break 0 links?

Rules 12, 13 and 15 were suggested by my warped mind, so here are some explanations:

Gray wrote:
re 12: I think 'lighter load' should only refer to difficulty settings, after all, the number of cars is set by the level author and changing it changes the way the level has to be solved
A real bridge works at any load up to the rated maximum. A bridge that fails for a train that's lighter than specified (less  cars, lower difficulty) is not clean.
I would (barely) allow specifying a maximum train length, such that a train that's lighter but longer would be forbidden to cross the bridge, too.

re 13: So compressed, 'buckled' cables only result from the exaggerated visuals of the game, those cables are not compressed IMO.
I am not talking about buckling cable, that is a relistic phenomenon, although not commonly found on real bridge types.
On my drawbridge, the cable that hangs down from the counterweight bumps down on the ground in a most unrealistic way. I think that bump compresses it (though it's so slight I haven't been able to make it out). Since cables are modelled as sticks joined together, they can be compressed if the force acts axially or on just one of the sticks. This is unrealistic and should be considered dirty.

re 14+15: Define 'steep'....
A real railway line in Europe does not incline by more than 1% or so (haven't checked this, anybody who knows exact numbers is very welcome!). There may be some tracks in the Andes that have steeper slopes, I'm not sure.
Dropping 1 HD unit on 8 is a 12.5% slope. If that was a road, you'd see a warning sign posted!
The only way to explain this is to say that Pontifex compresses the X dimension (much like model railways do) by some factor, and differently for the train and the tracks (that's why the train has so few cars, a car probably stands for 5 real cars). Unless this explanation is adopted by the "clean bridge commitee", all sloping deck in Pontifex is unrealistic.

after all, why is the player allowed to build decks at any angle in complex mode?
After all, why is the player allowed to do all the things you're deeming dirty? That argument is hollow.

Very few 'clean' (loosely defined at the moment...) record briges have a level deck now.
You are arguing by precedent, set by the self-appointed record keepers (good job, guys!); it amounts to "this is the way we've always done it" and avoids further justification.

Such a restriction would severely limit the scope of possible designs the player has at his proposal for every given level.
As does any "clean" rule you adopt.

IMO, No. 2, 4, (and 14+15) should be allowed for certain levels
As mentioned on http://www.chroniclogic.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=3&topic=51" target="_blank">One-way Bridges, maybe the levels that require breaking these rules should be considered "dirty". In my opinion, if a clean solution can't be found, a clean record does not exist. Leave that spot in the record table empty. If you're not expicitly stating which rules can be broken for that level, confusion might result.

VRBones wrote:
In my mind, slanted deck is a bug. Not because it is unrealistic, but it appears incorrectly in the designer section, therefore unintended by CL.
Could be a bug in the "edit" mode? If you go by CLs intentions, the whole discussion is moot, because you'd then simply adopt the contest policy for the clean records.

Chillum wrote:
(along with 12, 13, 14, and 15 - scrub those).
He killed my babies!

My suggestion is that in the description of the bridge, the designer states the rules that govern a clean score, possibly with respect to some published framework, which means we should adopt some "Clean Rules V1.0" (Chillum's list is a good start), and the designer could then say "Clean V1.0 except 12-15", or "Clean V1.0, only 3a".

Btw, I would have some special rules to add to such a framework concerning budget and width editing, even land editing.

The WTC did not have a criss cross infrastructure; rather the outer steel walls formed a sort of hollow tube that protected against vibration and wind sway.

You can read more on this (plus see some links) in the Bridge Builder Forums, in http://www.bridgebuilder-game.com/cgi-bin/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=4;t=18" target="_blank">this thread (click!).

Against war and terror in all shape or form,
mendel

(Edited by mendel at 2:21 am on Mar. 7, 2002)

You switch Z-coordinate (i.e. move the editing plane F/R) while the strut is still "hanging" off your cursor.
Step by step:
1.) click on a joint. You should now have a connection from that joint to your cursor.
2.) Switch z-plane by pressing R or F
3.) Click to create a connection between the planes.

Tip: Pressing "shift" while clicking (creates a bar, but you retain the connection from the original joint to the cursor) can save you a lot of switching back and forth if used wisely.

Hey - I wouldn't mind a contest every two weeks :-)
Once a month on a regular schedule seems like a good compromise, though.

Well, it's the next month and we're waiting for the next contest... ;)

Crossbeams are generated automatically in symmetric mode, even if you don't move the editing plane.

You can only pick beams that are near your editing plane + cursor. To pick crossbeams, move the plane one step back ®.

Get a bag of grammar!

Quote: from Chillum on 3:32 am on Mar. 21, 2002
Hit F8.

Is there a home where battered F8s can go to if they can't take the hitting any more?

Press R/F while an unfinished beam is hanging off your cursor. If you want to avoid switching back & forth, using the "shift" key often comes in handy.

That contest was fun... and the results surprising!