Why can't vehicles cross fords?

[gunnergoz]

I don't believe the issue is whether or not vehicles have the capability to cross fords, because it is an inherent design feature of virtually all military-specific vehicles.

Rather, the issue is if CM is meant to replicate the tactical use of fords in combat. Most armies would have an engineer unit carefully survey and mark out lanes in even a shallow ford before sending high value AFV's accross it. The risk of bogging is too great and once bogged, the vehicles that managed to go on ahead then become isolated and unsupported. What's more, removing a bogged vehicle from a body of water is an order of magnitude more difficult for the wrecker crews.

I think that this was a carefully thought out aspect of CM, calculated to keep combatants from throwing AFV's into situations that would truly be "gamey."

If a scenario requires a ford accessible to vehicles, it can be simulated by careful use of an alternate terrain tile (like brush) inserted in the path of the waterway.

[Eric Alkema]

What you are saying is that the scenario designer shouldn't have the option to include a vehicle navigable ford (or if he does, it will have to look like scattered trees, provide concealment, and cause mortars to airburst) and besides, crossing a ford in combat is such a bad idea that CM players shouldn't be allowed to even try.

I think the player should be allowed to be as reckless and stupid as he wants to be.

BTS once posted that one of the criteria for adding something to CM was that it should be cool. I think having makeshift fords is not cool, it isn't going to keep me from playing, but it isn't cool.

[Pzman]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scott Clinton:

Streams and creeks? 2-5 yards across and less than a couple feet deep???

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Remeber one CM tile is what 20m X 20m?

[Sirocco]

I think that often, especially on the Eastern Front, it was common for units to locate possible crossing points, get an idea of the depth of the water and the strength of the river bed, and then, when they'd established there was a good chance of getting across, they'd send a vehicle across, and the rest would follow at intervals. I wouldn't expect them always to have engineers at hand. And I would certainly expect that to have happened during major German retreats, for example in the summer of 1944. What does that mean for CM2? I would suggest a custom "ford" tile, with an increased chance of bogging.

I wonder if we'll also get more field fortifications..?

[Andrew H.]

I think that CM has fords right for France, since most of the actions I'm familiar with (Bulge, in particular) do involve steeply banked creeks that could be crossed by infantry, but not by tanks.

There are also streams that might be 15' wide and 12" deep; these are probably not obstacles to anyone and are maybe abstracted in other terrain.

However, things are different in Russia, and there probably should be some provision for vehicular fords, or at least a workaround better than brush. As fords tend to be under water, there should be an increased chance of bogging. But I'm not sure what the increased chance should be -- maybe one level worse than the normal weather? So a ford is "damp" if the weather is dry, wet if the weather is damp, mud if the weather is wet, etc. In deep mud, fords would be impassible?

Maybe fords are two levels worse than the scenario conditions, but engineers can improve them to one level worse, the way they clear minefields.

Horses and horse-drawn vehicles would move as infantry, of course.

[Tanaka]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by panzerwerfer42:

[QB]...Also www.panzerlexikon.de has an old video clip of...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yep... nice MPEGs, thanks for the link.

For CM2, it would be nice to make a 2nd type of "ford" where the vehicles could also cross. The Soviet road network (bridges included) was very poor, not like in France or German for instances, so this type of new terrain is a bit important for the Russian front.

[patboivin]

I can't shake the feeling though that these river crossings were rare, commanders probably avoided doing that if they could help it. There could be an element of surprise though, tanks crossing a river when nobody expects them to be able to.

I would still like to see fords in the game, though. I had the same question months ago, but I dropped it because BTS is spending their time on CM2 now.

If there wasn't time to do things when CM1 was developed, or if items were not considered important, OK. But to say that it just wasn't done, or that this or that doesn't apply in tactical situations doesn't wash with me, the great horse debate we had a few months ago comes to mind.

If a decision was made not to include something, then a decision was made. Let's not try to make up reasons on-the-fly to justify why -- life is shades or grey, and sometimes people make decisions, and that's the right thing to do.

No need to start a big debate back and forth.

CM is still the best game out there.

[ 04-30-2001: Message edited by: patboivin ]

[Mr. Johnson--]

I've tried making shallow streams and brush, esp Tiger's Bush mod, work great. Have a little river, then ford or marsh with brush in the middle, repeat. Looks good, and works good. The Ai will make a run for them if given the chance.