Rob Deans

The greatest weakness was its ROF. This merits discussion as to the strength it had due to its ROF. I think this has been talked about before, but a short mention..... The psycological impact that its weight of fire had was a strength unto itself. Automatic fire is not used to kill as much as it is to suppress, espcially in an offensive capacity. The same as indirect fire. NOW, it does a good job in causing cas too but the weight of fire laid down by one of these machine guns has a marked psycological advantage over rapid rifle fire from a section or the bup-bup-bup of even a 50cal, to list a few. On the ammo thing, I recently had a most interesting conversation with a German vetran. He started the war in the labour corps and followed the army into Poland, repairing roads and bridges. After conscription into the army shortly thereafter, he served in the 95th Infantry Division and marched 3000km into France and back in 1940. After being moved to the East he and his division took part in Barbrossa and was wounded in the head in late 41. After convelessing (sp) in Germany he found himself as an infantryman in the 21 Panzer Div. He was captured at El Alamein and spent the rest of the war in a POW camp in Alberta. The conversation was a little more in depth than that......One of the many interesting points he made was that the panzergrenadier sections had two MGs in them and that more often than not, the setion was simply an ammo carrying party for the MGs. He talked of "50 rounds for my rifle and 500 for the gun" and the like. He spoke of the difference between the infantry (1 MG) sections and the Panzergrenadier (2 MG) sections and how the two half sections would cover each other forward. Almost ever aspect of his stories was in some way related to, or had mention of the MGs and the ammo. "carry this and carry that........we had so much ammo to carry....". It was two of the best hours of conversation that I had in a long time. Rob Deans

Just a note on plunging fire. As far as MGs are concerned, plunging fire is less effective than fire delivered parallel to the ground. To use this example (bear with me).... Take a 2 foot long piece of cardboard and glue 10 dowels, about two inches in height, so that they form a line accross the card. "The Section" (squad). Now look along the row of "men" at ground level so that they all appear to be lined up. Imagine firing a machine gun at the first man. If your bullets miss the first they have a good chance of hitting the next and if they miss him then the next and so on and so on. This is the power of the beaten zone and the effectiveness of grazing fire. One burst could hit multiple targets. Now take "The Section" and look at it from a high angle. Imagine shooting a machine gun at the first man. If the bullets miss they go into the ground. Remember, in this example, you are looking from the point of view of rounds that are plunging whether they are that way because of the higher elevation of the firer or because of the extreme range at which they were fired. This is why plunging fire is less effective than the same weight of grazing fire. Thanks, Rob Deans

When a section splits in two, how does the computer allot the weapons to the half sections? Does the BAR, Bren or MG42 go to a certain half? If the section has two LMGs, does each half take one? Thanks Rob Deans

The A6 is the air cooled version of the weapon? What is the fire power of a 50cal HMG on a tripod compared an MG 42 on its tripod? I am curious to see if the 42 has, in fact, greater firepower but less penetration (against vehicles and fortifications) than the 50 due to the rate of fire. Thanks Rob Deans

What do you consider an MMG? Are you talking MG34/42 on its tripod, a Vickers gun, a 30cal?

" shot off 100 rounds w/o tracers" Hey at least you've fired an MG. How many game company guys have done that? In Canada we use an FN MAG 58 (C6 GPMG) as our GPMG and the 50cal as our HMG. There are few things more graceful than watching a 30 round burst arc way up through the air to a tank hulk 1800m (its max effective range) distant and seeing it land in its beaten zone. The hits light up like firecrackers at night. You really get an appreciation of how MG fire really works and how vital a good tripod thats dug in is. The gun can shoot farther of course but the fire begins to plunge and loose its effectivness. The 50cal will give grazing fire out to 1000m and reach out to 2000m and beyond. The tracer burns out long before that so it makes it difficult to adjust the fire if conditions are not good. What ranges are you using for your MGs in the game? Thanks Rob Deans

"The MG42 in the HMG role is very accurate indeed" What range were you firing at? Did you get to see the change in shape of the beaten zone from long and narrow to shorter and fatter as the range increased? Did you have any tracer? Did you use a T&E on the 30cal and 50? Did you see how grazing fire works? I'll be quiet now....... Rob Deans

Guys, this sounds excellent. It's just made my day (I am but a simple lad) To confirm, when you say "boresighting" you mean that the MG is registered to that target? The reason why I ask is because the actual meaning of the term is the process by which the sight unit (telescope/iron sights) is/are harmonized with the bore of the weapon. It has nothing to do with the target it is shooting at. I think the term is being used here to reflect the registration of targets, am I right? Thanks Rob Deans

"An AT gun might be bore sighted" Chris, do you mean registered to fire at a specific target? "Granted there was no coordinate system" Rhet, quite right. I don't know if you are familiar with the procedure but here it goes. The way to register (accuratly) an MG target is to adjust fire so that the bullets land where you want them. An FUP, gap in tree line, down a gully or any other likely place where the enemy might lurk in the future. You then set the dial sight or T&E mech and record the bearing and elevation that it reads. It is important that the dial sight does not actually point at the target but rather at an aiming point or stake close to the gun. Once this is done then the target can be "revisited" at night or low vis by setting the sight to the target's data and laying the MG by moving the gun so the sight (that is set) points at the aiming stake. The gun now points at the target and fire will be effective and can be adjusted by applying corrections to the sight. It may sound like a lot but it is very effective and simple once mastered. The smae priciples apply to the T&E on the 30cal and 50cal. It is much more simple in its mechanics but suffers from less effective fire due to its inherent sloppiness in the actual mechanism. It also can only do this procedure within a limited arc of about 45 degrees. The over lying concept in all this is the targets, once registered, are only good while the gun is in the same location. If you move it then you have to fire the targets agin from the new position and record the new data. This process actually doesn't take very long and, though most effective in a defnsive posture, can be used in the attack. "there were some good discussions a while back regarding Arty" Thanks I'll give it a try. I only made the comments because of what I read in the previous posts about registered targets giving an accuracy bonus to the fire put down on them. Good conversation as usual... Rob Deans

I'm sorry for going on. I guess my point was that registered indirect fire isn't any more accurate than indirect fire after adjustment. Thanks Rob Deans

I don't mean to upset you by continued responses but I have such high hopes for this game and would like to see it the best it could get. "less time pressure " The time factor is simply not an issue to a man on the gun who sits in his seat or stands by his sight and turns knobs. All he hears is "Bearing!....2353 (or it could be in degrees) Elevation!......0945" Whether it is a registered target or not doesn't even enter into the situation. "and no need for spotting rounds (and the error-prone correction cycle) also translates to better accuracy." The bit on the spotting rounds is a bit eroneous...For a target to be registered accurately there is only one way to do it. Adjust the target. There are two types of reistered targets, those that are adjusted and those that aren't. Those that aren't have no guarantee that the rounds will land where they are supposed to land (no accuracy). The targets that I suspect you are refering to in the game are ones that ensure accuracy, right? They by default have been adjusted before the game starts and have been recorded by the guns and the FOO and given a number or nickname. The fact is that the registered targets have gone through the adjustment phase of the mission the same as an "on the fly" mission so they are just as accurate. Once that last adjusting round lands and the FOO is happy that it is in the right place he says "Record as target No________". Done, target registered. The benefit is of course when that target is to be fired the Effect Fire Data is already at hand as the adjustment is already done. Where have you sourced your indirect fire info? I am a mortarman and would like to know if your info is based on real world testimony or a good amount of deduction from texts and generally accepted gaming practice. Again, I am interested and not questioning for the purpose of proving anybody wrong. Thanks Rob Deans PS Don't forget to "check out" (I wouldn't lie to you) the 30cal and 50cal "Traversing and Elevating Mechanism" too. Not quite as effective as the dial sight but serves the same purpose. US Army pams are available on the net and maybe there are weapons pams there too. It'll be in there. (the 50cal that is)

I have a question about direct fire weapon registration. The Vickers Gun had a dial sight and both the 30cal and the 50 cal had what's called a T&E mech. These devices were specifically for firing at night and when targets were obscured. Seeing as how there will be night action and fog/bad weather in this game (most excellent) the inclusion of this feature would be accurate as well as useful. My second question is about the registered artillery targets. Time is something that is definately saved when using these but accuracy is something that is not gained. At the gun/mortar line it makes no difference if the target is registered or not. The numbers are just applying bearing and elevation to their weapons and firing an amount of ammo. The advantage to registered targets is that the adjustment process does not have to be executed as it is already done and the "effect fire data" is written down for easy reference. Rob Deans

That's too bad about the Canadian thing. Our army doesn't use the same lingo as the American army. We may sound like some Americans but Canadian armyspeak sounds nothing like Americans'. If you get a chance to reconsider, Brit wording with Canadian accent would probably end up pretty close. We don't say "gear" we say "kit". We don't say "move out" we say "move now". We don't say "incoming" we say "take cover". Its these little things that would make Canadian gronards very happy. Rob Deans

Not really, para helmets would better fit the bill. Moreover the inclusion of Denison Smocks would be the truely distinguishing feature. Rob Deans

I have noticed tanks carrying troops in many of the screenshots available. I am curious how common was it for infantry to ride on tanks. I know it happened but I am not sure that it was extremely common on the western front. Are there drawbacks to the tanks performance if they are carrying infantry? On that note, what kind of modifier is there to fire against such infantry. Perhaps cover from the front (asuming the infantry are on the back deck and not festooned all over) and a bonus to the fire from the sides and back. All accounts I have ever read cite examples of infantry riding on tanks as an administrative technique (Canadian Army). Simply to get to an FUP or RV. Then the infantry debus and shake out/occupy for the assault/advance/defence/delay, etc.... Thats not to say that this ability for infantry should not exist. It should be modelled so that it is useful for what it is. If you're caught on the back of a tank when an MG opens fire you can put your head between your legs and ......Well you know. The player should be punished for poor tactics such as driving tanks with infantry up to the objective with the intention of a thunderous assault only to have three MGs open up at 100m and chew all those men into,......whatever. Two bits... Rob Deans

The main difference between WP and other smoke types is the fact that WP has an incendiary capability and other smoke types don't. WP rounds contain phosphorous and a bursting charge. The round explodes the same way an HE round does. The difference being that phosphorous replaces shrapnell. When the WP round explodes it creates a great deal of heat and that heat creates a column of rising air. Unless there is a wind (even a slight one will do) the smoke created rises in a column or "pillar". A WP smoke screen is very effective as the smoke created is copious, instantainious and can linger a long time. Other smoke types such as base ejecting and the like take much longer to create an effective screen. The creation of that smoke, however, does not create a huge amount of heat and the so the smoke does not pillar the same way that WP smoke does. On this note of smoke screens, does the player have the opportunity to choose a distribution of fire for the effect ammo? For instance, a platoon of mortars fires a smoke screen to cover friendly movement. The rounds fall in line of specific length and on a certain bearing to best cover the movement. Thanks Rob Deans

I posted this in a relatively simmilar disscussion elsewhere ....A quote from John Ellis' "The Sharp End" (pp133-134). It is itself a quote from an officer from the 3rd Bn Scots Guards (in fact an armoured unit) about the fighting in Normandy "We advanced with the infantry right around us, to protect us from bazooka [panzerfaust/schreck] men and snipers, and from hedge to hedge, making each hedge a bound. Each hedge was practically a tank obstacle anyway, as they were always on top of very high earth banks. As we came through a hedge we made the infantry look first to see if there was a Panther in the next field. If not, we went through into the middle of the field, brought up the supporting [tank] Troops up to the hedge, and then settled down to a quarter of an hour's speculative shooting up of the next hedge, HE into likely looking places, and Besa everywhere, including the tree tops. All this you must imagine happening under intense mortar fire and very considerable small arms fire........coming from all over the place, but from nowhere you could pinpoint it.....This may sound a very slow method of advance but it paid time and time again." When it boils down to it, no matter what country you're from, you've got to do what you've got to do...... Rob Deans

Will Heavy and Medium MGs have the ability to register targets for night engagment. More over will they be able to adjust off of these DFs? Rob Deans

Let me see.......Most stuff. Line infantry section and platoon and company. Royal Marine/Army Commando Sub Section, Section and Troop, Para and Airlanding Section, Platoon and Company. Mech stuff is a bit more intricate. Other than the motorized infantry found in Armoured Brigades '44-'45 (halftracks/carriers), APCs (Kangaroos) were an asset of higher HQ and were tasked to a unit for a specific job. They drove and dropped off. More like an armoured transport regiment (battalion) rather than an integral part of an infantry battalion. I have armoured info too. Rob

I'm willing to help if you want it....... Rob Deans

If this has already been posted, then forgive me. Have you presented the Orbats for the varrying countries in the game? Section platoon and company, weapons, strength? I have particular interest in the British/Canadian orders of battle in the game. Thanks, Rob Deans

On this point, will the ricochet of bullets, specifically tracer, be modelled? Rob Deans

A question about drills and SOPs that the conversation about reverse slopes brought to mind. A tactic, certainly of modern tank forces, is to jockey. That is to approach a crest with the view to engage a target. Once the target is aquired and engaged, the vehicle moves back off the crest and then left or right and does the same again. This minimizes the time spent exposed to enemy fire. I realize that the complete movement is a bit too complicated but to have a routine whereby the tank is set behind the crest and given order to "jockey". The tank will run up, aquire and fire, then retire to cover to reload. The left or right movement would be handled by the player. This seems as though it would fit into the 1 minute execution phase. Just a thought..... Rob Deans

I have a small question about some detail of the representation of these armies. Will the ranks of the various positions in the company(s) be correct? (ie The Officer Commanding a company is a Major with a Captain as second in command. A platoon is commanded by a Lieutenant or Second Lieutenant with a Sergeant as Second in Command and Corporals as Section Commanders. ((These armies refer to Squads as Sctions))