Serbia '14

[Elxaime]

Sorry for the delay but I just can't answer every question and still have time to do my day job, and also work on the next titles. But basically, this behavior is nothing new as far as I know, it has always been this way but it does make sense to me.

If heavy bridges are for everything (vehicles, horse, foot), medium bridges are for everything but vehicles (horse and foot), then it makes sense that light bridges are for foot units only. Rhetorically speaking, what else would the delineation in movement type be for the light bridge? So the restrictions do make sense.

Besides that, these light bridges are for flimsy "foot bridges" that were present on foot paths.  A single horse or wagon could certainly cross such a bridge, but the bridge wouldn't support repeated crossings by cavalry or artillery units (not that they would all load up on the bridge at once time, but that they destroy such a bridge from normal use - we must assume).

In S14, the foot bridges are placed in two cases:

1. Where there was a foot or horse cart path.
2. Where there were rail bridges, which are described in the notes document (rails bolted to traverses).

In either case, it is rationalized that a formation of cavalry or artillery could not cross at those locations, and this is very historical, given that text frequently mention that lack of good bridges to sustain operations - so its good that an entire formation might not be able to cross at the same place, or that a engineer must build a bridge to get an entire division across a river.

Hopefully that helps!

Yes it does!  Thanks!