removed

[unit12]

removed

[musketaquid]

Well, i would say, a wooden suspension bridge over a chasm would make more sense then one made of stones. I can not imagine how the stones bridging the chasm. The stones schould fall down, because the bridge looks planar and not curved like a stone bridge should be.

[Eleazar]

Post your new tiles here.

I wasn't sure where to post terrain, so I made this thread.

Here is a stonebridge over chasm. If you like it I will make a nw-se and a sw-ne version as well.

If there are any corrections or improvements you think it needs, and you don't feel like trying them yourself, run them by me and I will take a crack at them.

Sure, this is the right place to post terrain.

We certainly need a good bridge for the chasm. But there's some other things to take into account:
• The bridge image shouldn't have the chasm in it. It will be layered over the chasm by the terrain engine, to line things up properly
• The bridge needs to work in situations where it's longer than 1 hex.

[unit12]

removed

[Jetrel]

Well, i would say, a wooden suspension bridge over a chasm would make more sense then one made of stones. I can not imagine how the stones bridging the chasm. The stones schould fall down, because the bridge looks planar and not curved like a stone bridge should be.

You can put the arch and supports on the underside; these, likewise, would only need to go on the very ends of the bridge (you're limited by wesnoth's terrain engine; you can only do what can be done with a transition between the single tile of the ground at the edge, and the single tile of bridge next to it.

Largely, these would be visible only on the NE/SE/NW/SW transitions; they're be almost completely obscured on the N/S ones.

[musketaquid]

unit12 wrote:

With a form and some mortar a stone bridge can easily be made. throw in some superior dwarven engineering and we are laughing!

Ok, i agree

Jetryl wrote:

Largely, these would be visible only on the NE/SE/NW/SW transitions; they're be almost completely obscured on the N/S ones.

But i say it is visible on the N/S bridge too, due to shape and light.
The bridge has a down going shape. It would look from side view like this. (look at the drawing attachment)
But in fact there is no light and shadow over the bridge and so it looks planar.
A down going bridge should be darker on the front half and the middle and become brighter the nearer you get to the oposite.

[Darn Penguin]

I would personally like to see a wooden suspension bridge over the chasm, having it look appropriately rickety and neglected.

The stone bridge can simply be created by laying a stone path tile across it.

[Eleazar]

Well, i would say, a wooden suspension bridge over a chasm would make more sense then one made of stones. I can not imagine how the stones bridging the chasm. The stones schould fall down, because the bridge looks planar and not curved like a stone bridge should be.

With a form and some mortar a stone bridge can easily be made. throw in some superior dwarven engineering and we are laughing!

But, the bridge could still easily be wooden. If this was the case with some minor revisions the current wooden bridge could easily be used over chasm and lava (wood over lava?). This would fix the problem with my earlier post where the bridge only gaps on tile chasm.

Is their a preferance? Wood or stone?

With a clipping mask and some touch ups I can convert the the wood bridges to stone.

do we want a rail on the bridge? we can add a rope handle to the wooden bridge or to the stone bridge. As well, the stone bridge can have a stone rail/wall or stone/wood posts or just an edge. preferance?

Let me know If im heading in the right direction on this.

P.S
I have been building in layers. in, the orginal post the bridge can be a single entity.

Stone/Wood: your choice. There's probably room for both.

Rails? No.
Rails since they are naturally scaled to human-size would unnecessarily emphasize the discrepancy between unit, building, and terrain scale. A curb would be OK, if you wanted to take the trouble.

The clipping path method isn't good enough to get these added. The piers make no sense that way. I don't recommend using the cobbled road texture, it looks rather non-constructed.

Adding the joining tiles is optional.

[unit12]

removed

[musketaquid]

The pattern of both bridges looks good for me.
But you schould take another perspective. Take a look at the existing bridge. They were not drawn from a 90° top down view, you took.

"Adding the joining tiles is optional." let pretend i don't know what "joining tiles" are. how would you explain this?

This tiles are made for the neighboring tiles your bridge leads into. It's purpose is to make a smooth transition to the so called "joining tile".