RockinHarry

Pardon me, I´m Jerman!

I would think so, yes. In the game the whole HMG units are more exposed, than in RL, where usually the larger part of a HMG crew would be in full cover and better dispersed (to the rear). Normally just the gunner and crew leader, observing the battlefield with binocs, would be exposed to a degree, making the whole team a far smaller target for return fire and also spotting purposes.

btw. yet another source for NARA files and Foreign Military Studies, though incomplete. At least there´s no registering at the site necessary, the files are free and one piece downloads: http://www.sturmpanzer.com/sturmpanzer.com/Default.aspx?tabindex=5&tabid=613&item=1&sec=3

or just ask some the Gerries around here for correct terms. Usually germans that late in the war seldomly had enough troops to place outposts before the MLR and russians tended to establish themselves very close to it, unless the terrain is quite unfavorable. Beside the "Hauptkampflinie" (main line of resistance), the other main deployment measures in defence with inadequate forces, would be "Sicherung" (security detachment) and "Stuetzpunkt" (strongpoint).

PS: When setting up test missions for HMG´s, I´d rather go for combat ranges of between 800 to 1300m. 1300m is where you can get a HMG team start shooting, IF also setting a 1300m covered arc. Placing TRPs and use of those HMG teams that also have a binoc (not all HMG teams have binocs and some german teams have even 2), helps to evaluate in game performance at the combat range, that HMG´s where actually intended for. Below 800m, enemy infantry can return effective fire and this is also the range, where I also find it preferable to use the smaller LMG teams do the same job (the size 5-7men HMG teams are a pretty large target for return fire). Leaves a usable window of 500m (1300-800), where the HMG teams could be put to best use, any other factors left aside.

Good post overall. With regard to the YT video and guestimated distance, I´d likely go for around 800-1000m +, by just measuring visibility of individual tracers (around 1-2 seconds and MV of 755m/sec)

Agree. Even assuming 50 to 100 german MG´s (lMG and HMG combined) overlooking Omaha, would be a bit much IMO. 215 MG´s would assume a linear defense, with all of the german forces positioned directly in view of the beaches. Hardly imaginable. There´s rather a considerable force deployed in depth, as well as held in reserve, as to the usual german doctrine. I would also assume there´s some indirectly firing german HMG´s targeting the beaches, according to pre set fire plans prepared for such a long time. That means, a number of possible kills is not just from directly firing MG´s. If the figure 215 is taken as example, that each MG can be credited for so and so many kills (around 8) at average, then this is plain nonsense and a gross simplification, far from reality.

From my observations, fire directed at targets near TRP´s, appears to be more accurate, the closer the targeted units are at the TRP. I test mainly with HMG units at greater range (between 800 to 1300m). There´s no further mentioning of the TRP influential radius in the manual, so I too would assume, it´s one for all (50m) cases. IIRC in CMX1 firers lost benefits from TRP´s, once they moved away from their initial deployment position, which actually makes perfectly sense. No idea if it works differently in CMX2. Just wanna know.

Has probably been asked before, but need some reminder: Beside indirect fire arty, does the 50m influential radius of TRP´s also apply to HMG´s, PAK, ect., when not moved from initial deployments? The manual just mentions it to be used as "ambush marker" and from some my observations, the influential radius appears to be rather more around the ~20-30m mark. :confused:

interesting, yet debatable comment from "Intelligence Bulletin, Vol. III, Part 3, Dec 44, page 52 Machine-gun Fire "Our men have learned how to get around the fast-shooting German light machine guns. These guns have such a rapid rale of fire that they are not able to cover a great deal of ground. When our men have stayed well apart, the machine guns have not been able to do much damage. Actually, these weapons are terrific ammunition wasters. And our men have learned how to take advantage of the few moments afforded when the crew must change barrels. This happens frequently because of the high rate of fire. What ground the light machine guns cover is cov* ered well, but it's a very limited area."

almost exactly the same text from: Intelligence Bulletin, Vol. II, No. 9, May 1944 can be searched and found here: http://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/ Page 86 Section VII. GERMAN VIEWS ON USE OF THE MG 42 1. INTRODUCTION The cyclic rate of fire of the German MG 42 is 25 rounds per second. Most of the disadvantages, as well as the advantages, of the gun can be attributed to this single characteristic. As a result of the high rate of fire, the gun has a marked tendency to "throw off," so that its fire stays on the target for a much briefer time than does that of the MG 34, which can fire only 15 rounds per second. This section summarizes the German Army views as to the length of bursts to be used against hostile forces when the MG 42 is employed as a light machine gun or as a heavy machine gun. 2. AS A LIGHT MACHINE GUN The Germans are instructed to fire bursts of from 5 to 7 rounds when they employ the MG 42 as a light machine gun, since an operator cannot hold his gun on the target for a longer period. The gun must be re- aimed after each burst. To enable the bursts to fall in as rapid a succession as possible, the Germans try to cut the aiming time to a minimum. Under battle conditions the MG 42 can fire about 22 bursts per minute—that is, about 154 rounds. Under the same conditions, the MG 34 is capable only of about 15 bursts per minute, at a rate of 7 to 10 rounds per burst, totalling about 150 rounds. Thus the MG 42, used as a light machine gun, requires a slightly higher ammunition expenditure. Although the Germans be* lieve that when the weapon is properly employed, the compactness and density of its fire pattern justify the higher expenditure, recent German Army orders have increasingly stressed the need of withholding machine- gun fire until the best possible effect is assured. Al* though the German defensive trick of "lying in wait" has been adopted partly to gain the tactical advantage of surprise, it also fits in with recent German efforts to conserve, not only ammunition, but all other materiel manufactured by the hard-pressed industries of the Reich and the occupied countries. 3. AS A HEAVY MACHINE GUN German soldiers are instructed that when the MG 42 is employed as a heavy machine gun, sustained fire must be avoided at all costs. The German Army has ruled that the results of sustained fire are disappoint* ing and that the expenditure of ammunition involved is "intolerable." This, and the following German observations, do not apply, however, to fire placed on large targets at short range. The Germans believe that if the compact beaten zone of the MG 42 is on the target, a burst of 50 rounds should be effective. If the burst is not on the target, the Germans are instructed to re-aim the gun and, if necessary, to adjust the sights. The enemy considers it wrong to fire long bursts be* fore fire for adjustment has been undertaken and observed. At a range of 2,000 yards, for example,' the time of flight is 4.7 seconds. This means that the point of impact cannot satisfactorily be observed under 6 sec* onds. Six seconds of sustained fire results in an expen* diture of 150 rounds. The German Army tells its soldiers that if they will wait to observe the point of impact in firing for adjustment, a burst of 50 rounds should then prove adequate. While U. S. soldiers have expressed a healthly respect for the MG 42's high rate of fire, they agree that the gun's dispersion is very small—so small in fact, that they have frequently been able to make successful dashes out of the field of fire.

What 25 round bursts? The tripod HMG34/42 employs 50 round bursts as main tactical firing unit! Too bad, I can´t scan the appropiate sections from my german technical and tactual manuals, but here again a section from "Tactical and Technical Trends, No. 42, January 13, 1944.", which refers to a german source, coinciding with what´s in my manual: FIRING DATA, GERMAN MG-42 A German source states that the MG-42 has a close and dense cone of fire which results in greatly improved observation. The cone of fire has a slight "creep" hence this machine gun can be held on the target for only a short time compared with the slower firing machine guns. This German source states that as a result of the increase in the rate of fire from 420 rpm with the MG-08, to 900 rpm with the MG-34 and to 1,500* rpm with the MG-42, an increase in the percentage of hits in proportion to the length of burst should be obtained. However, preliminary trials in this country have not produced a rate of fire above 1,200 rpm. It would appear, in any case, that a high degree of skill and training are required to obtain the best results from the MG-42. Previous references to this gun will be found in Tactical and Technical Trends No. 32, p. 37; No. 31, p. 37; No. 21, p. 25; No. 20, p. 28. The following points to be observed when firing the MG-42 are taken from the German source referred to above: * * * a. When Used As a Light Machine Gun Trials under battle conditions have shown that the best results are obtained from bursts of 5 to 7 rounds, as it is not possible to keep the gun on the target for a longer period. The destruction of the target is therefore accomplished with bursts of 5 to 7 rounds, the point of aim being continually checked. It is of course important that re-aiming should be carried out rapidly, so that the bursts follow one another in quick succession. Under battle conditions the firer can get off approximately 22 bursts in a minute, or approximately 154 rounds. Comparative trials under the same conditions with the MG-34 showed that the best results in this case were obtained with 15 bursts in the minute, each of 7 to 10 rounds, i.e. approximately 150 rounds. It will be seen from this that the ammunition expenditure of the MG-42 is a little higher than with the MG-34, but to balance this, the results on the target with the MG-42 are increased up to approximately 40%. b. When Used As a Medium Machine Gun Long periods of sustained fire must definitely be avoided, as they do not produce the best results and lead to an unwarranted expenditure of ammunition. The reasons for this being, first, if the extraordinarily dense cone of fire of the MG-42 is on the target, then this should be destroyed in approximately 50 rounds; secondly, if the cone of fire is not on the target then the gun must be re-aimed, if necessary with adjustments to the sight. In order to assess the position of the cone of fire, fire must not be opened until an observation has been obtained. For instance, if with a range of 2,000 yards the time of flight is 4.7 seconds, then a useful observation cannot be obtained in less than six seconds. Sustained fire for a period of six seconds, however, is the equivalent of an ammunition expenditure of 150 rounds, whereas an observation of the position of the cone of fire or of the effects on the target, could have been obtained with 50 rounds. Trials under battle conditions on the same lines as those carried out in action with the MG-34 have shown that, in general, when using the MG-42 as a medium machine gun, bursts of 50 rounds with repeated checking of the point of aim give the best results. In this way, not only will the best results on the target be achieved, but the expenditure of ammunition will be kept within limits which will be very little in excess of expenditure with the earlier MGs. source: http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt09/mg42-firing-data.html

Thanks you! Works and looks good for me. No more odd patterns.

I see one thing completely neglected, since also ARMA is mentioned here: While the sky and precipitation visuals change, nothing actually happens on the ground! This also applies to maps, where mission weather is already rain. (Change of) weather impression is completely ruined, when none the ground AND vehicle/unit textures stay all the same (dry!). Smooth and dusty textures would turn way darker and also shiny to a degree. Vegetation changes to more saturated greens and last, but not least, any sort of dust (by vehicles and HE) would either vanish or at least be diminished a lot. Can´t tell if it all could be implemented by adding a different set of textures for wet ground conditions, or maybe just by changing shader parameters dynamically?

Hm...you mean at the rather short ranges (<= 3-400m ), a tripod mounted MG is as accurate as one with bipod (or vice versa)? CMX2 uses tracer rounds actually not, cause these were used at every occasion in RL. Germans observed fire accuracy by ground hit pattern, as well as "effect" on the target. Maybe ranging fires (before battle) used some, but beside that, these were meant to be used in the AA role primarily. At least that´s what´s to be found in any the german training manuals. The main concern for not using tracer rounds, was for the sake of camoflage. The MG Lafette 34 (the german tripod) would be normally operated with 3x targeting optics ( Z 40 or Z 44), while the gun section leader does target assigning and observing job, with at least a 6x30 binoc. If employed in sections/squads (Gruppe/Zug) or above, associated HQ´s will employ even more sighting and range finding equipment, in order to get the battlefield measured for the general fire plan. Some legal online sources for the interested: TM E9-206 A - German MG 34 Tech Manual http://www.cgsc.edu/CARL/docrepository/MG34Manual.pdf Special Series Nr. 9 - The German Squad in Combat http://www.cgsc.edu/CARL/docrepository/SpecialSeriesNo9.pdf Information Bulletin Nr.15 - Reibert - The German Rifle Company http://www.cgsc.edu/CARL/docrepository/BulletinNo15.pdf the latter two also provide some insights on usage of the MG34, both in squad lMG and HMG role. and more interesting stuff in the main folder: http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/docrepository/

It definitely does, though I can´t tell for every tripod mounted gun. The tripod MG34/42 at least preserves a pretty good accuracy at longe ranges and here it´s where high volume of fire in shortest time, makes the difference. It´s not hard to imagine what a pretty accurate burst of 50 rounds in ~2 seconds does to any target, compared to the pretty inacurate ones of 6-7 rounds in the game.

Speaking of bipod version as said. Actually it´s the approximately 1 second pull on the trigger and amount of bullets a burst, then may be derived from the actually assumed technical ROF (900, 1200 or 1500) for MG 34 and MG 42. So practically it can be anywhere between 15 to 25 rounds a burst. The main targeting mode in the lMG role yet remains at delivering short successive bursts (5-7 rounds) at "point targets". A "skilled" gunner can pull the trigger a little longer at point targets, preserving control of the gun, but "sweeping" along a broad target was both unusual and impractical and instead, "point target" bursts were put beside each other. This was and is the standard, while the 1 second trigger pull, as said, was for the "skilled" and/or target rich environments, emergencies, very short range ect.

Two other simple ideas and likely more simple to implement (repost...) 1. Those pixeltroopers, that are about to change clips, mags and belts for their small arms weaponry, go to full cover, instead of preserving the currently held stance (standing, crouching). In example, a SMG gunner standing behind a window, just emptied his mag. Currently, unless getting suppression at this point, he keeps standing fully exposed, while changing magazine. He should go to crouch, or even lying down, while doing. This is some the most annoying and stupid behavior to be observed in the game and usually results in say...20-30% more casualties for ALL pixeltroopers engaged in fire fights and reloading weaponry. 2. Buddy aid to be preferably provided in lying down position and not as currently in standard crouch. It´s quite annoying to loose so many pixeltroopers providing buddy aid, particularly those units in defensive positions and not moving. I always keep praying that buddy aid (no matter if applying first aid, or taking weaponry/ammo) is not applied in those cases, as the Tac AI´s impression of "security", is unreliable at best. Just watch your battles carefully and see how many ptroopers get hit, while beeing exposed unnecessarily due to mentioned cases.

The 1 second, 20-25 round burst (at max) is the bipod version. For the tripod HMG 34/42 version, the tactical firing unit is 50 rounds (one belt), continuous bursts, for any destructive and also heavy suppressive fires. I draw from these main original german sources in my possession: http://www.spwaw.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=18276

Meat Loaf.... I find the HMG34/42 burst length (less so for the bipod versions) and the Tac AI inability of engaging targets at the required longer ranges (800m + ) properly, the most problematic issues for this weapon system in the game. These render it almost useless for the intended tactical purpose. The 1 second, 20-25 round burst for the bipod version, would be for "skilled" gunners, but the quick succession 6-7 round bursts do the purpose quite well, particularly when engaging different targets, yet close to each other, at normal combat ranges (<400-500m). The primary tactical ammunition unit, for engaging targets with the tripod 34/42, yet remains single bursts of 50 rounds (a belt). My guess still is, that the game engine can´t handle slices, where this large volume of fire can be properly tracked, without either nearly halting the game (particularly in real time mode), or bringing related combat mechanics out of sync. For the Tac AI engagement behavior at longer ranges (800-1000m +), my guess would be that the standard sighting equipment (6x30 ??? :confused: ) in the game is insufficient for finding and tracking targets at these longer ranges. Also the Tac AI might find its hitting chances at these ranges to fall below its given tresholds. From game POV it makes sense, as 6-7 rounds a burst will do little, as opposed to the required and standard 50 round bursts obviously. From some further testing, HMGs can be encouraged to engage at longer ranges (1000m + ) more frequently by use of TRP´s, yet it´s not really more "effective" due to the insufficient burst size. This way it remains at (slightly increased) harassing level and it´s not worth to reveal a HMG position for this purpose to counter fires, particularly from enemy mortar and artillery. This IMHO degrades the HMG to LMG level, where both are pretty much equally effective at the lower combat ranges. A small LMG team then would be preferable to the 6 man HMG team, due to it´s smaller size for the inevitable return small arms fire.

According to the standard german procedure, handling burst lengths and accuracy of the tripod MG34/42, US army testers came to the same results. So I still think the notorious inefficiency of the HMG34/42 in the game, comes from just using the infrequent 6-7 round bursts, combined with the inaccuracy of the gun at the longer combat ranges, for which the gun was intended for. For harassing fires beyond 800-1000m, it´s just a waste of points and for anything below, the squad LMG will more than suffice. US Army report on MG 42 in medium machine-gun role Long periods of sustained fire must definitely be avoided, as they do not produce the best results and lead to an unwarranted expenditure of ammunition. The reasons for this being, first, if the extraordinarily dense cone of fire of the MG-42 is on the target, then this should be destroyed in approximately 50 rounds; secondly, if the cone of fire is not on the target then the gun must be re-aimed, if necessary with adjustments to the sight. In order to assess the position of the cone of fire, fire must not be opened until an observation has been obtained. For instance, if with a range of 2,000 yards the time of flight is 4.7 seconds, then a useful observation cannot be obtained in less than six seconds. Sustained fire for a period of six seconds, however, is the equivalent of an ammunition expenditure of 150 rounds, whereas an observation of the position of the cone of fire or of the effects on the target, could have been obtained with 50 rounds. Trials under battle conditions on the same lines as those carried out in action with the MG-34 have shown that, in general, when using the MG-42 as a medium machine gun, bursts of 50 rounds with repeated checking of the point of aim give the best results. In this way, not only will the best results on the target be achieved, but the expenditure of ammunition will be kept within limits which will be very little in excess of expenditure with the earlier MGs. (US Army 1944)

For lack of literature, I can´t tell what US, UK and USSR philosophies exactly were for developing their WW2 standard machine guns and associated tactics, but for germans it surely wasn´t to develop a MG for just getting rid of huge surplus quantities of ammo. Quite the contrary. They stuck to high ROF MG´s for all of the war, even thinking about raising ROF even more, despite the increasing shortage of small arms ammo from 1941 onward. (due to Adolf then himself demanded cutting production sharply, expecting the war vs. the USSR would be over by end of 1941). So what´s the deal about MG34 and MG42 (particularly the tripod version)? Suppressing and scaring the **** out of enemy infantry? Surely a desired side effect and yet secondary to the aim of actually hitting and thus killing infantry (or any soft target) most efficiently by means of: 1. Surprise fire on a good target (moving and well exposed in little cover terrain) 2. Putting as much bullets in shortest time as possible on target, as long as this "good" target yet presents itself. (The main point for having that high ROF). The main ammo unit usually is a belt (50 rounds), for a proper target in continuous mode (Dauerfeuer). 3. Fire concentrations by means of using pairs of HMG (the german HMG Gruppe) as principal firing unit for a given combat task. 4. Proper combat ranges. For HMG 34/42 it was intended to be upto ~2000m (+), yet deployment would be if possible, about 200-500m behind the forward infantry line (MLR). 5. Providing flanking fires before the MLR. Yet some associated point is little mentioned in discussions here. Deployment for flanking fire usually demands HMGs to be also frontally covered by terrain (keyholed). These is the basic german combat doctrines, or "by the book" stuff and everything else is derived from here to apply to the multitude of combat situations. So when setting up testing ranges for CMX2 HMG34/42, the above points should be well considered. Point 2. yet remains problematic in every case. Nonetheless, as long as there is "one fits all" game code for all the MG´s in CMX2, the MG34/42 will always appear "underpowererd". Implementation of individual capabilities and national doctrines might be a good thing for the future then.

In CMBN I learned to love (and fear) rifle grenadier troops, when it comes to urban fighting. Unfortunately they´re (germans) are a bit underequipped with ammo. Normally they take a full complement of 15 grenades (half HE/half Heat) with the grenadier, but in CMBN they have hardly half the amount. Do russians in CMRT have grenadier troops? The rubble pile mods are good when it comes to looks, but usually aren´t really an obstacle to movements, both for infantry and vehicles. Rubble tiles could be spiced up with AT obstacles and maybe AT mines (not yet tried) to make them a more realistic vehicle obstacle. As Sburke suggests, a modded heavy forest terrain tile might work too, but requires to also mod the brush billboards, which are likely reused (?) for other terrain.

IMHO it´s best not to directly start at one bridge end and rather use some start standoff about 3-4 AS away. This enables a full squad to deploy into the extended column formation while on the move more easily, thus avoiding early piling up where it´s most unfortunate (at, or on the bridge). Fast and Assault works best for me, depending upon likely enemy opposition. A Hide at start and end WP also is of good use, to avoid unnecessary exposure.

Maybe that, but maybe more so the PEGI rating thingy for portrayal of blood and violence. Might hurt sells considerably...