Allies share bridge access

[Alex486]

Hello,

In a recent game, I built a bridge to open another front. My allies could not use my bridge to move units across the same bridge.

It would be nice if that restriction was removed. Currently an allie can help me build a building, heal units, and repair units.

[ejm29]

+1

I always find this very annoying. It would be great if it was changed.

[ollie444]

I didn't even know about this!!!
Thanks for pointing it out.
I think even the enemy should have this access too, and destroy bridges as a secondary ability. (you click on them twice)

[ejm29]

Good idea!

[COOLguy]

I think that's great!

[Dgkfadomo777]

Ive noticed this for a long time, your allies actually can use bridges but, cannot land on it. For example a bridge is three squares across water, a knight can cross it but not a priest since it cannot be in bridge. Think of it like units cannot enter buildings but can go through them. However i still would like bridge landing for allies, that term is more accurate.

[Stratego (dev)]

could be, but effects we will have/we can deal with somehow:
- the bridge owner can kill the other unit by destroying the bridge
- the bridge owner cannot use his own bridge if it is filled with allied units (eg. AI flushes many cheap units tru)
- when any user click on a tile where there is a bridge and an allied unit on it: what will be selected, the unit or the bridge? (we would need an option to switch betw. them, since both selections could have reason for the user (though currently you can not select the bridge if you have unit on it either)

[ejm29]

(This is probaly a really stupid question)
Could you make player built bridges neural like the tc? So that landing on a bridge captures it for your team?

[ollie444]

Daniel, actually some of your problems could be solutions. (I am being deliberately cryptic here!)

You said that you could destroy a bridge with an ally on, and that you don't know what you should select when tapping the square. What if you can only select the ally? Then you won't be able to destroy the bridge, and two problems are solved. As for allies filling up the bridge... I don't really know, but it's not that much of a problem.

Ejm29, don't think you're stupid!
Your idea could actually work (although it would be harder to allow ally access). This would give enemies the choice to destroy a bridge or to control it.
However a problem is that it would require a lot of code for the new enemy AI.

[Stratego (dev)]

(side/off question: what about transporting units? (because a bridge is totally equally handled as a transport, a bridge is a normal transport that has 1 capacity and no movement and always reveals what is inside.))

[COOLguy]

I do not think allies should be able to use transports or enter structures that produce units. Then they can't go anywhere because you own the transport and you cannot get them out. If they go into unit producing structures they can clog them. But towers and bridges can be fine. Bridges are unique anyway - you can build off of them.

[Nykidxxx]

hmmm I've always thought of the idea that breaking a bridge and killing a unit is somewhat weird though, I have never heard of an account where you would break a bridge to the enemy base to kill the soldier on it. Maybe a case can be made for elephants (or 6 hoplites in 3 rams in 1 wagon hehe), but generally speaking this is not a really useful mechanism as you would have to rebuild a bridge to move across, costing valuable time.

So I want to suggest that
-The bridges enter a white state after being built (the white faction) and allows access to all players.
-You can only destroy a bridge after killing the unit on top. This is important because if you really need to break a bridge for strategic purposes, it shouldn't be so easy as a one hit kill, and this would allow the side who wants the bridge to protect it with a heavy trooper.
-Boats can cross through a player built bridge.
-The catapult can break the bridge through splash damage (not sure how the code would work, its not a necessity).


Regarding the allies crossing the bridge, well they are your allies right? Replan your strategy to use them as meat shields and build up for a charge, or support with archers.

[COOLguy]

That is a pretty good idea.
I have actually destroyed bridges to kill the units on top before.
Two birds with one stone, eh?

[Alex486]

As the one to raise the question, my opinion would be to make the bridge neutral for access to use it. The original bridge owner has the right to remove a portion of the bridge at their digression. So if an enemy is on the bridge, the owner can destroy it to remove the threat just like in real war. In WW2, bridges were sabatoge often. Light infantry would cross, as soon enough armour was on a bridge, the bridge blows taking out the armour and traping the infantry to get slaughtered or captured.

Maybe make the bridge colored to the owner.

If too many meat shields clog the bridge, oh well, just build another bridge.

[Stratego (dev)]

status: I started to do this, turning on was easy... but it seems that it is a deeper harvest..
(sadly i was expecting that no other player's unit can be in a carrier - a bridge is a special kind of carrier - so in code there are many places needs modification - so i inactivated the modification until all places modified - also can affect performance that i do not want...)