Jump to content
Aragorn2002

StG 44 in the upcoming CMRT module

Recommended Posts

Here's an interesting discussion about the use of Sturmgewehre 44 and it's availability. Definitely something to consider for the upcoming CMRT module. It comes down to the conclusion that the use of the StG 44 was more widespread than usually thought.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2568621&mpage=1&key=&#2568621

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

StG 44 is hardly the most exotic weapon to expect from the CMRT module. There's the (literal) German Sten, the MP 3008 I believe its called (approx. 10,000 made). There's the weird MP 507 which uses the same ammo (and clip?) as the StG 44 that's basically a scaled-up pistol operating system used for a rifle (again, approx. 10,000 made). There's the... um... Ugh! I'm thinking of another late war German rifle but its name is escaping me. Anyway, we're likely do see some pretty funky stuff appearing the closer we get to war's end. :blink:

 

1498.jpg

MP3008.jpg

Edited by MikeyD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's the... um... Ugh! I'm thinking of another late war German rifle but its name is escaping me...

Ahh, you are referring to the already too many G-43's in the BN, RT & FI Games...Yes, I'm sure BF will no doubt add even more STG-44 & G-43's to each Squad/Platoon in the next Modules.

So, before you know it, every other German Soldier will be carrying Late War & Exotic Small Arms...And, why not, since the standard Russian Infantry Squad in RT unrealistically already have a mix of several SMG's, SVT's, and get this, for some reason still have 1-2 Mosin-Nagant's (go figure).

Edited by JoMc67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, JoMc67 said:

since the standard Russian Infantry Squad in RT unrealistically already have a mix of several SMG's, SVT's, and get this, for some reason still have 1-2 Mosin-Nagant's (go figure).

Got some references that show the numbers being off? I ask because what you see in the game is from pretty extensive research so if there is a mistake or additional data having that would be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was actually thinking of the G-41 semi-automatic, but that wasn't 'late war' after all, that was more a mid-war stinker of a rifle design that only saw limited production (if you want to call up to 140,00 units produced 'limited'). 

The old Mosin-Nagant is actually still in use, I believe. Ukraine was running low on sniper rifles so began modernizing its Mosin Nagant stocks into 7.62x54 precision sharpshooter rifles.

 

mosin copy.jpg

Edited by MikeyD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I hope is to see whole platoons equipped with the StG 44/G43. Divisions like the 1st infantry division and the 1st Skiijäger-division used them as their main infantry weapon. I also hope to see more Panzerfausten in a platoon, as is the case in CMRT.  I'm not so interested in exotic weapons to be honest. Perhaps for the Volkssturm, but not in regular units.

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, MikeyD said:

I was actually thinking of the G-41 semi-automatic, but that wasn't 'late war' after all, that was more a mid-war stinker of a rifle design that only saw limited production (if you want to call up to 140,00 units produced 'limited'). 

The old Mosin-Nagant is actually still in use, I believe. Ukraine was running low on sniper rifles so began modernizing its Mosin Nagant stocks into 7.62x54 precision sharpshooter rifles.

The G41 is an interesting piece of firearm history. Very thematic for German design and production of the era. I'm getting flashbacks at my rant about problems with early war German tank design. It was designed with the requirements that it had to be semi-auto but work like a bolt action. Why? Germans wanted firepower of a semi-auto and the reliability of a bolt action.

One of the requirements was no gas piston system, which explains the gas trap (named Bang after the Dutch inventor) at the muzzle. The other was a back-up bolt action mechanism. Last one was that it needed to load like a '98. They got Walther and Mauser to design them:

450px-Gewehr_41_mauser.jpg

Mauser G41

k6tcxr427gd01.jpg

Walther G41

Mauser followed the requirements, Walther cheated. Too bad for Mauser, the requirements were bollocks. Both were produced, almost 7k for for Mauser variant and around 100k for Walther. Both of the rifles were loathed on the Eastern Front. They were inaccurate, didn't cycle properly, were easy to damage and expensive to produce.

A good chunk of them got returned, I'm guessing even more of them got tossed. Walther solved the biggest issue, being spawned by unrealistic requirements, and scrapped the Bang system for the SVT-40 gas-piston. This became the G43. Too little, too late. As the war neared its conclusion, production was eventually shifted to Volksturm bolt action rifles.

I'm not surprised to see the Mosin still being used. The Enfield is still being used, and was used for a long time post-war as a marksmen's rifle. If it was good enough for Simo Hayha, it's good enough for Donbass.

SVT-40 had a funny history too. Very much akin to those Hollywood underdog stories. It was first designed and produced as the replacement for the Mosin. It was very much on track for that, until Barbarossa. A LOT of them were produced (1.5 mil or something like that). They were excellent semi-autos introduced into an army that needed simple bolt action rifles.

They were very much coveted by the Germans, the Fins and later, the Soviets. Germans actually issued their own field manuals for these things. Not only am I not surprised that they are as common with the Soviets in RT, I am surprised that I don't see Germans using them.

The Soviets were purposefully SMG heavy during Bagration, the cheap PPS-43 being an engine for that. Those things took a few hours to produce, and hundreds of thousands of them were being pumped out monthly. Hardly exotic. Great SMG too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually the disagreement is the appearance of the Stg, even in earlier test iterations, in games which occur in 1942, such as Stalingrad. They just weren't weren't being tested there.

Late war Berlin? The Ardennes? Sure - still not ubiquitous, but that's primarily where they were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DerKommissar said:

They were excellent semi-autos introduced into an army that needed simple bolt action rifles.

It's a decent rifle, but I wouldn't call it excellent. It has a finicky gas valve that has to be set just right with a wrench (i.e., something easy to lose), or else it becomes a very fancy bolt-action rifle. It also never sufficed as a sniper rifle, and so the many sniper scopes built for it were re-calibrated for the M91/30.

That said, if you have nothing else (e.g., Finland, Germany), it's a decent design. I have a 1940 model built by Tula that I take out to the range a few times a year. It's a PITA to clean, though.

Edited by LukeFF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18 September 2018 at 8:03 AM, Aragorn2002 said:

All I hope is to see whole platoons equipped with the StG 44/G43.

For flavour maybe. But I don't think it really matters much in gameplay though. The stg44 seems quite weak in this game. At least in CMFB I don't really notice it. Seems as effective an mp40 more or less. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

For flavour maybe. But I don't think it really matters much in gameplay though. The stg44 seems quite weak in this game. At least in CMFB I don't really notice it. Seems as effective an mp40 more or less. 

In my experience the range is better than the MP40.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:

In my experience the range is better than the MP40.

Yes it is. But I don't really see much impact for a weapon that was apparently revolutionary at its time... Just my two D-Mark 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

Yes it is. But I don't really see much impact for a weapon that was apparently revolutionary at its time... Just my two D-Mark 

Well, it was easy to manufacture, wasn't it? And the ideal mix of a submachine gun and an (automatic) rifle. Pretty revolutionary in itself.

According to Dieter Handrich's 'Sturmgewehr 44', this weapon only was succesful when a whole unit was equipped with it ('Erfolg nur durch geschlossenen Einsatz').

A long time ago I had the opportunity to shoot with it. Such a sexy weapon, although quite heavy.

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:

Well, it was easy to manufacture, wasn't it? And the ideal mix of a submachine gun and an (automatic) rifle. Pretty revolutionary in itself.

Yes, I understand, but my point was that I haven't really felt much difference in this game. I sort of feel I should be able to notice a real difference, but I'm no military historian or expert.

All I know is that when I started playing CMFB, I was very interested in whether my infantry had STG44 or not, but now I don't really care. I do care if they have 1 or 2 MGs though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Yes, I understand, but my point was that I haven't really felt much difference in this game. I sort of feel I should be able to notice a real difference, but I'm no military historian or expert.

All I know is that when I started playing CMFB, I was very interested in whether my infantry had STG44 or not, but now I don't really care. I do care if they have 1 or 2 MGs though.

 

Hard to notice a difference, since every situation is different, I guess. But range wise there should be more impact. But I'm also no expert.

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Aragorn2002 said:

Hard to notice a difference, since every situation is different, I guess.

I haven't tested it extensively, but in my humble experience even at close ranges (50-100m) in forest or towns the STSG44 does not seem to perform better than the Garand. I actually think the Garand is better, which surprised me.

At longer ranges, the STG44 fires very slowly for an automatic rifle, and accuracy seems really low.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I haven't tested it extensively, but in my humble experience even at close ranges (50-100m) in forest or towns the STSG44 does not seem to perform better than the Garand. I actually think the Garand is better, which surprised me.

At longer ranges, the STG44 fires very slowly for an automatic rifle, and accuracy seems really low.

 

I see. Well, that's odd indeed. Perhaps something to look into for the BF boys. On the other hand, the Garand is pretty good and the StG 44 was more or less an improvisation.

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Aragorn2002 said:

I see. Well, that's odd indeed. Perhaps maybe something to look into for the BF boys.

Yes, I think so too. Not expecting a "Wunderwaffe", but I think the STG44 should at least be something to be reckoned with. Something to be noticed when present. But I don't have the time and skills to do a proper testing to prove there's an issue.

The only thing I can do right now is to write on this forum that I'm a player who has this opinion, and if I'm the only one to have that opinion, well.. as they say, everyone has one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Yes, I think so too. Not expecting a "Wunderwaffe", but I think the STG44 should at least be something to be reckoned with. Something to be noticed when present. But I don't have the time and skills to do a proper testing to prove there's an issue.

The only thing I can do right now is to write on this forum that I'm a player who has this opinion, and if I'm the only one to have that opinion, well.. as they say, everyone has one.

Nothing wrong with that. Your opinion is appreciated. And you might very well be right too. I think the StG 44 was more about economical efficiency than firepower, but I could be wrong. Of course firepower was a very important factor as well.

Haven't had the time to read Handrich's huge book entirely. 🙂

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LukeFF said:

It's a decent rifle, but I wouldn't call it excellent. It has a finicky gas valve that has to be set just right with a wrench (i.e., something easy to lose), or else it becomes a very fancy bolt-action rifle. It also never sufficed as a sniper rifle, and so the many sniper scopes built for it were re-calibrated for the M91/30.

That said, if you have nothing else (e.g., Finland, Germany), it's a decent design. I have a 1940 model built by Tula that I take out to the range a few times a year. It's a PITA to clean, though.

Most countries had malfunctioning prototypes as semi auto rifles for most of the war. SVT was the original battle rifle, with its detachable mag (complete with its own nearly useless automatic variant). In Europe, at that time, it was certainly the best semi-auto. The Garand, even without detachable mag, was a better rifle. Maybe "excellent" was a slight over-exaggeration on my behalf.

Are there many semi-autos that do suffice as a dedicated sniper rifle? Even today, bolt actions are usually used by snipers. Semi-autos do appear often as designated marksmen's rifles.

As for the MP 44, I always saw it as an NCO weapon. I believe the original idea was to give NCOs, and very specialized shock troops, a more versatile MP. It wasn't really designed to the tolerances of a rifle, and was therefore easier to manufacture. I think this was well presented in FB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, DerKommissar said:

As for the MP 44, I always saw it as an NCO weapon. I believe the original idea was to give NCOs, and very specialized shock troops, a more versatile MP. It wasn't really designed to the tolerances of a rifle, and was therefore easier to manufacture. I think this was well presented in FB.

It wasn't planned as a NCO weapon or just for specialized troops like the MP40. The idea behind the Sturmgewehr was what it's name implied, an assault rifle, to overpower the enemy with firepower in close combat and other actions within the range of 200M and at the same time to have a rifle capable of accurate fire at  a distance of 500-600M, although accurate fire at that distance is not easy. The plan was from the start to replace all K98 rifles, Mp 40 SMG's and even MG 34's and MG42's in the standard infantry platoon. Although I think they (would have) reconsidered replacing the MG 42, since it was such a superb weapon.

It would be interesting to have the option to chose/change the (mix of) infantry weapon for a platoon. I remember in CMBB it was possible to change the number of Panzerfausten. In a scenario with for example the 1. Infanterie Division, it would be great to be able to give every platoon of that division Sturmgewehre, as was the case in real life. That division was one of the first units to recieve a large number of Sturmgewehre 44 (the in the link mentioned number of 2 800 is confirmed in Handrich's book). It was it's main infantry weapon in 1944/1945. This division only fought on the Eastern front. It's reports about the StG 44 were very positive.

Apart from the 1st Infanterie Division it was also decided in the summer of 1944 to give 8 other divisions each 570 StG 44 and two other divisions each 600 StG 44, so each company would have it's own platoon (s) equipped with StG 44. More divisions followed and the number of StG 44 per division also increased, so yes, the StG 44 was a very important and widespread weapon in 1944/45, especially at the Eastern front.

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:

The plan was from the start to replace all K98 rifles, Mp 40 SMG's and even MG 34's and MG42's in the standard infantry platoon. Although I think they would have reconsidered replacing the MG 42, since it was such a superb weapon.

I read that MkB-42, Machine Carbine '42, was intended to replace the '98 and had a limited production run. Yet, when it entered mass production, it became a Machine Pistol. The logistics situation mid-war not allowing for the replacement of all '98s and their ubiquitous Mauser ammo. This is the first time I am hearing them replacing the MGs.

This being said, the Germans often had unrealistic expectations -- especially regarding weapons. From what I understand, the "Sturm" name was propaganda. Much like the word "grenadier", it was applied late-war to instill unfounded confidence in a fleeting fancy.

The MP-44 was a revolutionary, and well received, design. However, the production history shows that it was treated as a specialist SMG, rather than a service rifle. This is the best production data I could find on German small arms, if anyone has better ones I would be very grateful:

xLTq23h.png?1

https://ww2-weapons.com/german-arms-production/ )

It seems that the production of traditional rifles greatly increased in 1943 and continued to increase in 1944, as the war demanded. The full-caliber bolt action shows no signs of going away. The "Stg" entered production in July 1943, and had the total wartime production of 426k. The production for the MP-40 from '42 to the end of the war was around 750k. As total SMG production number rose, the MP-40's remained the same.

There is an increase in the ratio of SMG to rifle production. This was the same among most countries, as more expedient SMGs entered service. This was especially relevant on the Eastern Front. MP-44s being issued to Schutze must have been a rarity -- especially when considering the ubiquitous Mauser cartridge weapons. Considering it was ready to enter mass production in '42, it was never fated to become their service rifle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found one, very rare, I tried all sorts of formations and didn't see any. Despite it being listed in the manual and on the website TOE I was beginning to think there weren't in Red Thunder. Then finally I found a Company HQ asst. that had one. ETYvFOa.jpg

Edited by Jace11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×