Some questions about the game's realism

[HXLFSJ]

In the game, the off-road parameters are ineffective. Whether it's infantry with an off-road value of 100 or wheeled trucks with only 30% off-road value, their off-road speed depends solely on the terrain's speed modification coefficient. Also, the obstruction of streams to vehicles is underestimated. Generally, trucks should be immobilized when crossing streams, entering forests, or swamps, rather than just having their movement speed reduced by 20%.

I also failed to see the role of amphibious capabilities in the game, and a similar situation exists in nuclear, biological and chemical protective capabilities.

Another issue is whether it is possible to further refine the soft - target killing capability of HE ammunition? The current four - level killing efficiency is not sufficient to cover the differences in the soft - target killing capability of small arms - 20mm/23mm HE, 30mm/35mm HE, 57mm HE, 76mm/85mm HE, 100mm/105mm HE, 120mm/125mm HE and HE over 152mm, which limits the authenticity of the game.

[Veitikka]

In the game, the off-road parameters are ineffective. Whether it's infantry with an off-road value of 100 or wheeled trucks with only 30% off-road value, their off-road speed depends solely on the terrain's speed modification coefficient. Also, the obstruction of streams to vehicles is underestimated. Generally, trucks should be immobilized when crossing streams, entering forests, or swamps, rather than just having their movement speed reduced by 20%.

The database has the unit 'mobility' attribute for this purpose, but it's not been activated in the engine yet.

I also failed to see the role of amphibious capabilities in the game, and a similar situation exists in nuclear, biological and chemical protective capabilities.

Nikola wrote this on Discord:

The amphibious crossing is not simple as just driving your vehicle into the water.

The depth and width of the river, bank conditions, and the current’s velocity are major factors to determine the unit’s ability to conduct a crossing, even if amphibious. These factors will determine if the force can cross by fording/swimming, and by rule, reconnaissance of the near shore and predetermined crossing sites are necessary. Such actions are performed, whenever possible, by engineer reconnaissance teams which might be drawn from the divisional level, identifying "wet gaps" early and deploying the required resources to allow hasty crossings.

Also, due to the limited organic crossing assets, additional support from echelons above the brigade combat team or regiment is often necessary. That support is only available when that HQ have taken purposeful action to position the assets at the right time and place and integrate them with the manoeuvre force to make a hasty crossing feasible. Coordination of these assets must be made early in the planning process.

So, it is a complex process, both doctrinally and in game terms. Currently, we do have shallow water and fording areas which (at least abstractly) assume above-mentioned preparations were made.

Another issue is whether it is possible to further refine the soft - target killing capability of HE ammunition? The current four - level killing efficiency is not sufficient to cover the differences in the soft - target killing capability of small arms - 20mm/23mm HE, 30mm/35mm HE, 57mm HE, 76mm/85mm HE, 100mm/105mm HE, 120mm/125mm HE and HE over 152mm, which limits the authenticity of the game.

Currently no, but more customization options may be added in the future.