Username

I find it hard to count rounds when firing on full auto. More than likely, a gunner would count bursts. If he was around 5-6 bursts, he would get a feeling the mag was low. Anyway, there hasnt been much in tha way of documentation shared as to the BRENs extra-squad activitys. The only issue about the BREN gun carrier is actually part of the problem shared by halftracks of all nationalitys in the game. MGs and mortars cant be offloaded, forcing players to fight these vehicles like AFVs. The initial claims about commando type units was made. Was there ant TOEs or any references that showed these extra weapons? Lewis

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Richard Morgan: How does a BREN/LMG gunner realise he is out of ammo? In the words of the drills:The weapon fires, THE WEAPON STOPS!!! Let me try and make that a bit clearer... the trigger is depressed, and nothing is happening, there are no banging noises, no kick, no ejected cases, ziltch in fact. Oh, dearie me, what has happened?!!!!! I know, if I carry out the first IA, I might just find out A)whether the gun is out of ammo, or whether the gun has had a stoppage... Am I missing something here :confused: Richard.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes. The weapon is fired in bursts. Some say 3-5 or whatever. What I am asking is, is it possible, that a BREN gun can be fired and it will fire a burst (using up the last round lets say at the end of the burst) and the gunner does not realize he is out till he attempts to fire again? Its a subtle point I am trying to make so as to compare the belt fed weapon to it. A belt fed weaapon allows the visual indication of ammo being at the ready. Lewis

http://www.brengun.org.uk/manual.html It came from here. I repeat, how would a BREN gunner know he was out? Its not that hard a concept. He fires a burst and could it be possible that he had fired his last round and not known it? Would it be possible that he would know it by pulling the trigger? Maybe you might visit the other BREN thread and grace us with some more of your wisdom? Lewis

Suppression is also linked to the velocity of the weapon doing the firing. A SMG firing at 900 RPM and a HMG firing at 900 RPM for equal bursts dont suppress the same. The HMG is firing a supersonic bullet that even if it misses the target and just flys by, creates a very uncomfortable CRACK. It is physically felt as well as audibly scary. The higher velocity bullet also kicks up more dirt, bark, stones, dust, etc. It also penetrates cover better as other mention. Suppression is part of paying respect to a weapons system. When it snaps the whip, you go for cover. Lewis

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: I reread your arguments and still find no taxonomy, just your commentary that the Bren is indeed an LMG. Thus, it is probably worthless to continue along these lines. Even Tero came up with a taxonomy of sorts (by dictionary definition). .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well the games own taxonomy calls the BREN a LMG. Thats right, as a squad automatic or a SAW or whatever name you want to give it, its a LMG in the game! look for yourselves. But is that the point? You have it then. Its a LMG according to BTS. Lewis

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brian: The Vickers fired a rifle-calibre round, therefore it is by definition an MMG. HMG's fire a heavier calibre round, usually 12.7mm - 15mm. Over that calibre is usually classed as they utilise exploding rounds, as a "cannon" (there are exceptions though. The Russian 14.5mm HMG utilised a HE round). .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> In the game, I cant recall that the vickers is ever named heavy, medium, etc. But the HMG42 is called a heavy, the US 50 cal and water cooled 30 cal are heavy and the US air cooled 30 cal is called a medium. The BREN is called a LMG btw (in the game). Lewis

If you check the other MG threads ongoing, I dug up BTS saying that a german could carry the boxes two per hand (the handles being designed close to one side). Concievably, 4 boxes per man. Thats a thousand rounds per ammo carrier. So a six man HMG42 could have 3 thousand boxed plus whatever is on the gun/dangling from the others. I have also seen photos of these boxes being backpacked. In reality, the parent org the MGs belonged to would have some sort of battle resupply running forward. The game does not abstract this. Lewis

quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Stalin's Organ: Yes, but it was over 20 years ago now, so this is a bit hazy...... The Bren fired from an open bolt - so if you had a misfire the bolt would be forward, whereas if you had an empty mag it would be back as the Mag had a projection in it that stopped the bolt moving forward when empty. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There was no holding open device for the Bren. When the magazine was empty, the bolt could and did return forward if the trigger was pulled. This is what I question. In a M16, after the last round, the difference is felt in recoil and sound the weapon makes. The condition of the weapon on the last round indicates its state. The bolt is back. After minimal training, you learn to release the clip off the weapon, insert a new clip and release the bolt (inserting a new round in the chamber in the process). It isnt the same for the BREN. It would need anticipation from the crew. When firing M60s, or any belt weapon, this isnt an issue. A quick glance at the belt assures that ammo is present. A good assistant will tell you when to slow up so he can put another belt on to the existing one. The potential for a holdup is minimalized by a belt fed weapon. I have never fired the BREN but from what I read and hear here, I think that I would be constantly 'topping up' in a battle situation. By that, I mean that if there were ever a lull in firing, I would immedietly want to pull the existing clip off and put on another full clip. Brian, since you probably have experience with both BREN and belt fed weapons, What would you rather have? Given the weight of the early Marks of BREN it would probably mean a few pounds more to portage a belt but whats your honest opinion? Thanks Lewis

"The "might" is the working term here. Given that US rifle squads are 12-man by default, arguments could stem that greater allowance be given on how the split is done, such that the BAR-carrying half-squad be given more or less men by player choice. Or for US '45 rifle squads, the two BAR's get bundled together in one half-squad as a support-fire element? These aren't specifically equivalent to breaking off squad BOF weapons into seperate teams. But the cases above are equivalent in scope. And I could readily see some CM players asking for such features someday, if squad BOF weapons are being considered to get added "detail" options." This was mentioned in the other thread (BREN: Separate) also. Its largely ignored there because of the rioters who are willing to settle for nothing but separate LMG support weapon status for the BREN. BTS moderation here would certainly move the issue forward. They are, after all, the principals that would be making the change. I am not speaking for them when I say belted weapons are the cutoff. I am just looking at the present design form and it appears to agree with me. Who knows what the future will be? Perhaps LMG altogether will be dissolved as a support weapon. In instances where there were LMG or SAW (fill in your own name if you dont like those), half squads will represent those weapons. But the BRENNERS have dug in their heels and its support weapons or nothing. They dismiss observations such as JAMMING of support weapons and MOVEMENT penalties, etc. Its not a very productive discussion without BTS and as far as I am concerned, Slappy, started a thread with good intentions, moderated it himself, acted like a gentleman and was kicked in the ass for his troubles. Lewis

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tero: Originally posted by Username: Could these principles be as stale as the categories ? Whose principles is the game built on ? Is the set of principles used all encompassing and universally true ? Contrary to common beliefs different armies had their own sets of principles. Some of them coincided with the rest of the sets, some of them differed from the rest. When you bow one way you moon the other way. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The principles are made by the principals. They are an expression of the design team. The design team must assess the various weapons from different military cultures (regardless what they are called) and model them IN THE SAME WAY. So fleets of different cars from different nations are going to race ON THE SAME RACETRACK. Is it all encompassing and universally true? Cmon. Your rhetoric is so thin and non-constructive. Do you ever read what you write? So, uh No. It wont model infantry warfare between Finninsh troops and armed exoskeleton type creatures from another planet. You seem to miss the point. It doesnt matter what its called. The weapons are not words in the dictionary. When you bend over backwards to try to please everyone in the universe, you usually get kicked in the ass anyway, so dont bother. The game (again) uses abstractions. Games like CM and CC and others represent discrete weapons and infantry units at certain levels. People will always feel that they are slighted when weapons appeared to be cutoff. To me the cutoff level is belted MG firepower. Right now, CMBO, agrees with that. The game is not stale but rather in a state of change. The change people (lets take off the gloves, the BREN-Nazis) want is two iterations down the road. The next iteration will showcase many changes to the face of the infantry battle. So, what you call something now, will be in a different light in the future. Thats not stale, thats evolution. Lewis

I thought the Vickers was a HMG. You aussies must have some kind of autocannon held at battalion level. Lewis

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tero: Can anybody provide actual British/Commonwealth TOE that would show if the Bren was indeed deployed both as a SAW and in a support role during WWII ? Or not as the case might be.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Theres a whole thread going on about this right now. Unfortunately, you might as well just go to the last page of that thread and ask the same question. It has just been said as being fact. Facts being what people want them to be. The game has abstractions , of course, and there has been no BTS input so its all a big muck fest. Lewis Lewis

I would also give a MG34 a 8 as a LMG and only a 7 to the MG42 as a LMG. The MG42 gets a 8 as a HMG and the MG34 gets a 7. So, what gets a 9 as a LMG? I leave that to more modern weapons that reduce the caliber size. They dont get high HMG marks though. What do I give a US M1919 air cooled tripod weapon for an LMG? Believe or not, a 4! It only gets a 4 as a HMG though. It gets a 1 as a squad automatic (tripod or bipod). Believe it or not, the game (says) it uses fuzzy logic. What I am doing here is giving fuzzy responses. That does not mean vague. It means fuzzy. If everyone who ever fired a weapon did the same, you would get a very good representation of capabilities. Reading (and chuckling) at responses from David convinces me that he is of a certain mindset. Thats fine. I accept it. But the game is built on principles. Not stale catagories. I hope you open your minds. Lewis [ 08-27-2001: Message edited by: Username ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: I reread your arguments and still find no taxonomy, just your commentary that the Bren is indeed an LMG. Thus, it is probably worthless to continue along these lines. Even Tero came up with a taxonomy of sorts (by dictionary definition). By the way, AT units has individual MG42 teams to provide security, which is very different from the MG42 tossed into a platoon HQ (and used as a spare) or the Brens used as a spare in the same manner.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes read Panzerjaeger.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brian: I wonder how you'd handle a Fighting Patrol which was usually about 1.5-2 times the size of a normal section and contained multiple Bren's, Lewis. Their role was to specifically seek contact with the enemy and conduct a quick assault. There are numerous other examples of where sections were given extra Brens for specific tasks (primarily assault). According to you, this would be impossible. Yet once more reality intrudes on your rather narrow minded ideas of how the British/Commonwealth armies used to operate.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I would asign them into the squad like the german squads with extra MGs. Since you dont give exact numbers, I will make them up. 2 squads with 3 BRENS? easily done with the ideas already expressed. Recon: Small lightly armed element detaches (example:sten and 3 riflemen or M1carbine and 3 garands) leaving the rest. These recon boys get the morale hit only. Deploy: Automatic weapons in one group and rifleman in the other. Fractions depending on the size of auto group. So if a squad has 2 BAR maybe it 'splits' 5+remainder. If it has 1 Bren then its 3+remainder. This is me from the same page of this same thread. Please read the thread page you are on. And please address the ammo and stoppages issues if you would. The hardliner here (not you) strikes me as someone with no experience. Lewis PS question to those that actually fired BREN. Since the weapon had to be cocked, how would you know when the last round was fired from a magazine? Is it entirely possible that a gunner could fire a burst and not know that he was out? (h) Stoppages and immediate action. 1. A well cared for gun with the gas regulator set at the correct hole (normally No. 2) will rarely stop except on account of an empty or a badly filled magazine. 2. In all cases of a stoppage the Immediate Action is: (i) Pull back cocking-handle. (ii) Remove the magazine. (iii) Press the trigger. (iv) Examine magazine; if empty or badly filled change it. (v) Put magazine on and cock gun. (vi) Continue firing. Note. Possible causes: empty magazine, badly filled magazine, missfire, bad ejection, hard extraction. from the link I posted..Any BREN gunners here? I repost this because it seems there isnt a difference between stoppages. In a belt fed weapon, it is quite clear whether you have ammo or a jam. I dont even think that the BREN team has been properly spelled out for what it consists of. Is it tripod mounted? Have 2000 rounds of ammo? 3 man minimum? [ 08-27-2001: Message edited by: Username ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASL Veteran: Seeing as how the MG42 and the Bren are in a different weapon class, there is no way to make a Bren into an MG42. A Bren is an LMG while the MG42 is a GPMG. Even Lewis can see that <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well not quite. The BREN is not a MG42 but a MG42 is a BREN and then some. I would give a BREN a 8 as a squad automatic but only a 3 as a LMG. It is a 0 as an antitank rifle and a 0 as an intercontinental ballistic missile. David is right. What he says doesnt matter. Nor I or anyone else. Its BTS listening to these arguments that matters. I think Slappy is getting the feeling that bushwackers are revealing themselves. I saw their stripes a mile away. Lewis

Slappys good. I thought you had him on the ropes. He's like slithering in 3 dimensional space on the fly. I think that BTS agrees with the functionality of weapons arguments. They are changing MG effectiveness, and squad automatics and GPMG (in whatever incarnation) will be upgraded. Luckily, there will be a testing ground in the form of CMBB before any new lines are drawn. BTS has also said that after CMBB ammo will be tracked individually in the squad. This might or might not help the social upward mobility of Mr BREN. Time will tell. BTS aint talking. Lewis

One of the things that I forgot to mention is that the BREN was a selective fire weapon. It could fire semi and full auto. The BAR, while not, select fire, could squeeze off single rounds in its low rpm mode. The german GPMG in its LMG form could origionally do this. The MG34 had a rocker trigger that allowed single shots and full auto. The germans eliminated this feature in later weapons. They were deliberately getting away from the squad automatic and moving more to the MG mentality. They wanted the base of fire built around the full auto machine gun. The MGs were to do the suppression and the killing. I personally think a 3 shot option would have been a nice touch for the MG42. Lewis

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Andrew Hedges: I don't know the weight of the Bren boxes, but I think four MG 42 boxes weigh around 70 lbs total. No wonder my HMG teams are so slow. CAVEAT: I think I remember reading that one of those 250 round ammo boxes weighed 8.4kg. That seems about right, but I'm not sure if I'm remembering it correctly.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think I remember reading 50 rounds was 5 lbs but am having no luck getting any info. I dont remember M60 boxes weighing all that much either.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASL Veteran: Weapon classification is what I addressed. If you would like to make a contribution to the discussion of how the Bren should be classified, then please tell me what that classification would be and why.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is what I responded to. I believe the game closely agrees with me in its present form. Weapon classification according to semantics is making me think of fuzzy logic. Examples like A pig is a low fit for the catagoy known as horses. They sometimes run real fast so thats the reason. Its 'fit' (fuzzy digit) would be low on the scale. I am actually leaning now towards the elimination of the LMG from support weapon status. The GPMG in its LMG form should stay within the unit structure of squads/half squads and not be a support weapon. Lewis [ 08-26-2001: Message edited by: Username ]

just thought of something. Do support weapons like the german LMG ever abandon their weapons and become a crew? Most of the time they just die to quickly to do anything.

Just kidding

The BREN is a squad automatic. Its main purpose is to support the squad in its fire and movement. It (the BREN team) fires and the rest of the squad moves. Its heavier than other squad automatics and lends itself then to leapfrog tactics. Its at one end of the 'squad automatic slider'. The BAR would be at another end of this 'slider'. Both these weapons fire full powered rounds from magazines. The BAR evolved into a lighter weapon function and many troops took off the bipod to lighten up. The US troops, who had good moving fire, relied less on the squads own automatic. They could rely on belted MMG as well as their own internal distributed firepower. The BAR then became a more mobile single man weapon than the BREN. It fired less (due to lack of barrel change) and moved more. It relied less on other squad members as far as operation and only for distributed ammunition portage (like the BREN also). The BREN was not a GPMG. It could not fire belted ammunition. This is a major firepower demarcation point. Putting the BREN on a MMG tripod does not make it a MMG. The subtle part of belted ammunition is battlefield resupply. The game abstracts this out but wouldnt the BREN team have to reload its own magazines? They were not discardable I would venture. The belted ammunition (even though it might be belted at a factory or at a ammunition point further back) is brought to the GPMGs and HMGs in belts. The crews of these weapons save the water-tight boxes for these belts. The BREN at 25 lbs had some weight but no wiggle room to be a multifunction weapon. It was not a GPMG. The BAR got lighter, some sources state 16 pounds (without bipod), and this is really a big difference. Movement being easier and firing much like a shouldered weapon being previously mentioned advantages. So, as much as I am putting them together, they each had their advantages/disadvantages. The GPMG class that is defined by belted ammunition feed, quick change barrel, bipod/tripod mounts belongs to the germans. The british did not have one and niether did the US with the bipod 30 cal (which had a light barrel btw that could not be changed). The US M1919 tripod with the 'fixed-heavy' air-cooled barrel was not a GPMG either. It can be seen as what the BREN could not be. It was stuck in its cubby-hole. It can best be described as a crew served MMG. A minimum of 3 men would be needed to move out; the gun, the tripod and the ammo. It could not match the HMG42 in firepower and only justified itself to complement the water cooled M1917 and cover the US squads in attack (because of the previously stated BAR limitations). The GPMG in the light role gave an offensive and defensive advantage in the long-burst capability that these weapons demonstrate. The suppresion of defenses and the defensive killing zones that can repel attacks changed infantry tactics. The ability to maove to alternate positions and not be located easily helps the defense. If the BREN could fire belted ammo (and its barrels could be changed quickly) then I would upgrade it to a GPMG 'slider' rating of entry-level. Lewis

"Ah, but the MG 34 was used in the LMG role! The MG 34 was developed from the Solothurn MG29. Type of feed: 25 round box. Therefore, if the MG 34 was developed from a weapon with a 25 round box feed it can only be classified as an ‘Automatic Rifle’." Logic like this means that since I evolved from a line of hairy apes so ergo I can only be classified as a hairy ape? BS aside. People are getting hung up on names and analogys. The fact is the game looks at performance levels and things like belt feed is a quantum leap in firepower output. A green/regular unit with a belt feed MG might only be approached by elite units with magazine fed weapons. The game is going to make green/regular the norm. You dont have to reply to me ASL. But feel free to respond to issues. Its called a discussion. Lewis

I am obviously making a point that for an independant BREN team to have enough firepower, it would have to have a means to move ammo IN MAGAZINES. For a 3 man team, the weight is begining to add up. What people (in this thread) are telling me, is that the portage of this ammo is a distributed function across the squad. Hence the reason it is a squad automatic. For some independant role, this then becomes an issue. 12 clips, even in a sandbag, would weigh over 30 pounds for 340 rounds or so. Belted ammunition is lighter. I forget what M60 boxes weigh but will dig it up the info. Also, people have been saying that the team will be using a tripod, this also hefts about 30 pounds. The BREN would not then be available separately without buying a BREN gun carrier. In the squad, the BREN could RUN with the others (in real life, it would be at the back of the pack). In a separate role, the BREN would be limited to MOVE and maybe not ASSAULT. I am not sure if support weapons will be ASSAULTing in the new movement commands. All things to ponder. Perhaps I will cut and paste this also in the other thread. Lewis [ 08-26-2001: Message edited by: Username ]