Belt Bridges

[Lextreme]

The point of Factorio is making a massive factory with all of it on display.
There is even a "Show your creations" section on this forum.

Why is it that we have the option to make tunnels instead of bridges?
We are hiding parts of our glorious factory!

We need bridges!

[batorfly]

Nah bro. This ain't gonna happen. At best- someone create a mod, but i even doubt that.

Better place for this post (in my opinion) is in: Ideas and Requests For Mods

[Lextreme]

Why isn't this going to happen?
I really can't see a reason.

[evildogbot100]

Whatever you do, only 1 lane of belt can be shown in an intersection. The current overground belt is functionally the same as your suggestion.

[Lextreme]

Whatever you do, only 1 lane of belt can be shown in an intersection. The current overground belt is functionally the same as your suggestion.

Yes I am fully aware that the functionality is the same.
What I am talking about is purely cosmetic, an underground belt is just boring to me because you see (slightly) less of whats happening in your factory.

[batorfly]

Belt bridges can really mess things up (in the belt spagetti bases- there is already a LOT of stuff, you don't need moar), and they will be hard to make, all transitions and rotations, a lot of work to make it look good. There is already so much stuff to do, so even if dev's consider this, it will be so low priority, that you will wait for it years, you really choose timing poorly, when we don't even have stable 0.16 Next point, logic thing: underground belts and bridges should create possibility to run in one lane with underground, otherwise they will not make much sense. But that feature means less of logistic challenges.
You don't see point why not, but i don't see ANY point why yes.
One more thing, nowadays we don't use UG belts bc they are UPS friendly, so in 99% cases you have something between them, so it's more of a matter of what do you want to see, assembler, pipe, inserter, or other belt. I can't even say belt bridges = headcanon to factorio, bc of so little sense this feature make.

[bobingabout]

how high is your bridge?

will a nuclear reactor fit under it?
will an oil refinery?

This is why we don't have overland stuff, the way factorio is designed doesn't lend well to this sort of thing, underground is the solution, because then you don't have to worry about height... like, at all.

Cliffs have been added, but they're 2D flat walls, an illusion.

[olafthecat]

I have suggested this already.
Elevated Belts and Bridges

[Lextreme]

I actually truly hope I have to wait years until this is added to the game.
Since that means that this great game will still be updated all that time.

Anyway, in my intentionally spaghettified factories I want more stuff.
The more incomprehensible the factory is, the better it is.
Bridges will add to this in a positive way I believe.
And no, bridges and tunnels do not have to run in one lane.
I think the function should be exactly the same as a tunnel, it just looks better.

To answer bobingabout's question: a bridge should have as little height as possible.
Just enough for another belt and the player to pass under it.

Yes, I do realize the devs are probably way to busy to add something as redundant as this.

[olafthecat]

PLS merge with my topic

[n7m6e7]

The bigger issue with belt bridges, is they do the exact same job as Underground belts, but worse, as they dont give you the UPS boost of underground belts, and complicate matters when you look at it, as it will appear as a normal belt until it crosses over another entity, or a player walks under it.