Waterlogged Units

[Hub]

Just wanted to break this out of another thread. It seems that units not classed as amphibious are able to cross river terrain unassisted, in the RT demo scenarios.

[kbluck]

By my understanding, there are two sorts of water modeled: "shallow" and "deep". Amphibious vehicles can be set to cross one or the other, or perhaps both. Infantry, apparently, can cross any "shallow" water, just as amphib APCs and such can, but not "deep" water. So, all infantry can cross where "shallow" amphibious vehicles can.

Personally, (speaking as a combat engineer) I think this is not a very accurate model. Hooah ranger-style poncho-rafts aside, you really can't expect a typical platoon of infantry carrying heavy weapons to "swim" across a river deeper than 5 feet or so if the water is very calm, or much more than 3 feet if the current is even slightly strong. Anything dismounts could reasonably wade across, almost any non-amphibious tactical vehicle could cross as well. Even an HMMWV can ford water up to 5 feet deep with some preparation. Conversely, anything that would stop a non-amphibious vehicle would also stop infantry without assault boats (which I would classify as "amphibious infantry".)

"Deep" vs. "Shallow" water really has little to do with amphibious swim capability; its all about shorelines and currents. In general, it would be *easier* to swim a deep, slow river with nice, evenly deposited banks than a shallower, faster river with lots of bank erosion. The major obstacle to most amphibians is not usually floating as such, but being able to get in and (more importantly) out of the water safely.

I personally would model water features thus:

"Fordable": Pretty much anything can cross.
"Snorkelable": Amphibious vehicle or snorkel-equipped vehicles can cross.
"Swimmable": Amphibious vehicles can cross, but not snorkels.
"Bridgeable": Site is not swimmable, but is suitable for emplacement of a bridge.
"Impassable": Nothing (except aircraft, obviously, and perhaps hovercraft) can safely traverse, nor can a bridge be emplaced.

In addition, you might include an extra attribute that can be applied in combination with the above:

"Maritime": Deep-draft seagoing watercraft (LSTs, etc.) can safely traverse.

If you want to get *really* high-speed, you should also specify where features are "breachable" so that engineer work can improve a given site by one level --- an "impassable" site to "bridgeable", for example.

All that aside, when push comes to shove, I think the water-walking infantry is going to be considered a "feature" rather than a "bug". Maybe the next game will do something different. But while I may not get my "engineer dream", I would encourage Pat and Curt to at least revoke the infantry's privileges at the earliest opportunity.

--- Kevin

[Hub]

I can't comment on what "river" terrain covers in the context of the demo- I can only assume given the number of amphib vehicles present in "Beach Party" that the "river" is not meant to be fordable on foot and the vehicles are to be used for transport (realising that they could be used whether there's water or not- but I think it's meant to illustrate some of the new toys and features). That's OK, we'll know what was intended soon enough...