Apocal

The attacking side gets more points (relative and absolute) in an assault compared to an attack. 73% overage vs. 57% during tiny QBs.

I'm skeptical of your machine gun training if you don't know it takes like fifteen to thirty minutes to get barrels down to air temperature once heated (not overheated).

They are in the game, some tank commanders have them in-lieu of Tommy guns.

You sure about that?

Open terrain should favor a general trend toward lower unit density compared to more closed up terrain.

Were there any notable actions similar to the Tatsinskaya raid conducted during Operation Bagration? Most of the (free) accounts focus on more conventional grist for the wargaming mill, but deep battle talks about using fast moving independent columns of armor aggressively to raise hell in the enemy rear, exploiting holes in their defense and there could be some cool scenarios in there.

I too, would enjoy something in the same vein as Devil's Descent or Cobra's Strike. I wonder if FMB is still around, I haven't seen him in awhile.

I don't even understand what you're getting at here.

Uh... yes, if you send four bullets at one target and hit him, you save three bullets over the gun that uses seven to perform the same feat. Once again, how is this wrong? edit: if you want to see the advantage of a MG42, you probably want to see how they perform when the targets are fleeting...

So in other words, the downside of higher RoF is that you use more ammo per unit of time? Is this supposed to be bad?

Yeah, rounds have to pass through vital areas to actually deal mortal wounds, typically. At least the usual calibers; obviously high caliber stuff like 12.7mm, 14.5mm and 20mm has serious destructive power wherever it hits.

That isn't really how it works, most damage is done by permanent tissue damage caused by the round (or fragments of the round) passing through your body, perforating organs, major cardiovascular structures, central nervous system, etc.

There were beer machines in my barracks around the turn the century.

"tankodesantniki"

My second scenario is up, "Nighttime Knockout". Not sure if links to the repository work, so if not, its under RT/Missions. I'd really like feedback, if its reasonably well-balanced, fun and what Rankorian and JasonC were asking for.

Its another measure to bootneck neo-nazis by stopping them from making bull**** claims about Jews tricking or interfering with the Red Army, setting it against its "brothers and natural allies" of the Third Reich or sometimes claiming that cowardly Jews led Soviet forces which is why they took such high casualties, etc.

Yep, that worked, thank you.

OK, thanks.

Set the HQ as reinforcement, then set the reinforcement time for longer than the scenario will last. Voila! Absent HQ. I have about five or six scenarios sitting around at that scale - I think the biggest is a reduced company - and I can polish them up a bit and push them out. I just didn't think there was much demand for them and my map-making skills are sub-par at best. I already prettied up the first and am waiting on it to appear in the repository (Escaping the Noose).

I saw a request for very small scale, quick scenarios in a thread and decided to polish up and publish some of the stuff I have sitting around that fits the description. Unfortunately, I forgot that *.btt isn't an accepted format and when I re-did the upload info, I think it got dumped in the CM:AK category. Can any repository admin fix that for me? Its named "Escaping the Noose" and should be under Red Thunder scenarios.

1. LMGs just as "battlefield" accurate at the quoted ranges as HMGs. 2. Machine guns use tracers to adjust their aim once they fire, not the sights. 3. Its entirely possible to accurately adjust the aimpoint of a medium caliber (7.92 in this case) MG while firing using tracers. Its less possible with a true HMG (50cal) just because the whole setup bounces around too much. My personal experience, YMMV, etc.

That's why I inlcuded the word "practical." As a practical matter, the accuracy is the same at those ranges. The limiting factor on machine gun accuracy at those ranges isn't stability of the firing mount. Its actually preferable, to keep an adequate beaten zone at short ranges. Tracers. You can walk tracers with a machine gun - well, a medium caliber one, 50 cals are something else.

Why would it be any better? The German rifle squad has an LMG with practically the same accuracy out to 250-300m and slightly more dudes.

Darn. At least it wasn't a popular feature. You used to be able to plot out waypoints in the scenario editor, save them and use them in-lieu of (in or conjunction with, can't remember) AI plans.

I'm not sure what you're arguing here: in-game a HMG42 team gets as many kills as a German rifle squad at 100-250 meters - at least until suppression or casualties take the team down. Obviously the rifle squad has two teams so its a bit more resilient in terms of resisting suppression, but the HMG42 still does about as well at killing and suppressing the enemy in that range. Are you arguing it should be better?