PzKfW

422 is precisely what I meant. Most non-marksmen (IE: lay shooters, or GIs from 1944) do not understand the difference, but when it is explained to them they readily agree that the concepts are distinct. I don't think it is very important to the issue at hand other than to say that the MG fire sweeping across the action square(s) which the target squad occupies, as shown in the OP, is likely in effect a game modeling of dispersion. Whether you want to call it intra-burst or inter-burst (it looks like sweeping fire to me). I also counted the rate of fire for the HMG in the last twenty seconds of the 2nd video in the original post. There was seven bursts in twenty seconds. That makes each minute, assuming no belt changes, etc, have 21 bursts. Each burst was around 5 rounds. That means that 105rds/min is the maximum firing rate of an HMG 42, on a stationary squad, in the open, at 200m distance, with no interruptions. Funnily enough, the opening of that video in the OP has a belt change. Guess how long that takes? 34 seconds. Even with a barrel change, that is ridiculous. A barrel change takes maybe 10 seconds. Maybe. As shown, at a rather leisurely rate, in this video at 25 seconds into it - 6 seconds, taking your time. The effective ROF for the HMG in the video, for the entire minute and 9 seconds, was 9 bursts, at 5 rounds each. That is less than 50rds/min. Also, the end of the video has what sounds like the HMG squad pausing their fire to reload... again. (Remember, they had just reloaded at the beginning of the video). Which, if true, means that the game is modeling MG belts of only 50rds, not 250.

To a GI or lay shooter in general, "accuracy" only means if a target is hit when it is aimed at. This can comprise either precision or accuracy. The above definition fits "dispersion" as it is mentioned in the document. By the way, your usage of these terms is reversed. Inter-burst means between bursts. And intra-burst means within the burst. If you want to get precise.

Thank you very much on the reference to Zaloga's body of work

In scientific, not military, terms, I believe we could translate the GIs' "accuracy" to mean precision. And their "dispersion" to mean accuracy. It's a bit confusing but scientific definitions are... no pun intended... precise in their meaning.

Dispersion is the natural variation of where each round impacts if the gun is aimed at the same target. I see what you're driving at JonS, but I suspect it is your "a" definition. Otherwise, with such a high ROF, even a large cone of fire (or dispersion) would be adequately saturated with bullets. IE: more effective. Although angular dispersion is largely equal at all ranges, the absolute dispersion increases with distance to the target. This is why, I suspect, that The Bulletin mentions of the MG34: If you assume "a", IE: a high ROF, but small dispersion for the MG34/42, then the benefits of the high ROF, especially at close ranges, are largely negated and what the GIs are saying then makes a lot of sense. If vehicle MGs have the same behavior (I have not observed it, but tend to believe akd) then I believe this may be CMs way of providing artificial dispersion. If true, then the real issue at stake here is the effects of HMG fire. IE: not realistic. The main issues are suppression and lethality. To my mind, when observing fire effects on a target, caused by a squad, both suppression and lethality really equates to the sheer number of bullets whizzing by the heads of the target troops. HMGs are getting unrealistic results not because of suppression levels, etc. But because they simply aren't making enough fire to produce accurate/realistic results.

Now that we've discussed reality (albeit in the past). Just want to point out a few things here about our CM's modeling of reality (it is supposed to be a battle simulator, after all). 1. HMG fire may appear to be purposefully modelled as inaccurate. Although, if you think about it, that makes no sense, as vehicle MGs are far more accurate and of similar type. (Might be an interesting test to conduct) 2. The volume of LMG fire as modeled by CM is under-represented versus reality. 3. The volume of HMG fire is ridiculously low versus reality.

From the above Intelligence Bulletin V2, No4... For the MG34 LMG: That's 150 rds/min. And for the MG34 HMG variant it is mentioned that: Regarding the MG42, the bulletin has to say this: Thats 22x(avg)6=132 rounds/minute And for the MG42 HMG, it is mentioned that and And as for PLACEMENT of the HMGs... As for how much dispersion (the natural drift of the bullets fired at a single spot, of the "cone" of fire put out) the MG42 had, well... not too much (Not the case in present CM -or discussion here eh, JonS?)... from Section II. U. S. SOLDIERS DISCUSS GERMAN MG TACTICS: and again... although, regarding accuracy (where you aim, versus where you hit)... and

Fernando, it appears that from "the book": 1. HMGs, when on the attack, were used in stationary weapons overwatch sites. 2. LMGs, when on the attack, maneuvered with the squads/platoons whilst the infantry advanced. 3. After a successful attack (at the company level), positions were consolidated and new weapons overwatch sites were chosen, at which point the HMGs were moved forward. 4. While on defense, HMGs were sited in a series of fallback positions.

JasonC, I have been following this thread (obviously) with great interest. Thanks for restating the points brought up in this thread. One thing I might point out is that the game already does model reduction of ammo based on loss of team members. In fact when German squads get split, if the number of guys in the squad has been reduced, the section without an MG (with k98s, say) still gets a significant amount of the total squad 8mm ammunition, leaving the MG team(s) significantly reduced ammo loads. Also, if a HMG team loses a few guys on the move, a portion of their ammo is immediately lost (the portion the lost guys were carrying). If they lose a few guys stationary, it is not. As to squad effects versus MG effects on suppression. It is pretty simple, an American squad has 10 M1 semi-auto rifles, a thompson smg, and a BAR automatic rifle, IIRC. Perhaps a 1903? In any case such as squad has 12 men independently spotting and choosing targets for each of these weapons. The cumulative fire eminating from such a unit, when these weapons are within closer ranges, completely outclasses the relatively few bursts eminating from the HMG unit, as it is currently modeled. Turn up the HMG ROF, and you turn up the suppression and lethality effect. (accuracy also matters).

Just to head certain people off at the pass, sMG is the acronym for schweres Machinegeschutz (heavy machine gun). I agree with you Fernando. HMG positions are in any case more defensive in nature and thus ammo weight and mobility are less of a factor. On the whole, I feel the mobility of these teams is certainly over modeled in game, whilst their effectiveness is woefully under-modeled. Shooting minimal bursts as if it were a LMG, whilst retaining the same mobility of a LMG, makes it a bit more of a flavor unit than an actual heavy weapon position.

Michael, that's what she said.

Are you saying that Norton wants to call it a virus or malware when you scan it?

And by the way, Avast blows the turret off Norton.

So just download the .exe, save it to drive. Don't run it, first point your antivirus to scan it. Clean? Voila. Run and install.

Oh, any ol' dish soap'll do.

Pondering the meaning of life, sir. Pondering

Really annoyed at my Lynx crew in a game going at the moment. I lost control of the crew, who bailed out from the perfectly fine tank, when they were not under fire, in full view of a rifle squad about 150m away. Who then shot one of the crew as I remounted them next turn, shocking the tank crew - about 20 sec later on the same turn, a Priest showed up on a ridgeline about 200m dead ahead and took its leisurely time lining up the kill shot without any return fire from the Lynx. Grr...

Pretty sure you're wrong there, Michael. If there's dish soap in the dishwater. Detergents/soaps kill yeast and a lot of different fermenting bacteria, especially the Gram positive types. Just messin' with Mr. Right.

LLF, you have convinced me not so much of the incredible overpower of HE shells in the game, as of the incredible worthlessness of fortifications and cover in general in the game. This is surely something that should be fixed.

LMGs within a squad, versus HMG positions. We need to understand what precise situation is being talked about here. They are VERY different situations, obviously. I can live with the squad LMG performance in game. The HMG is another story. Are ammo limitations the problem with turning up the ROF "knob"? Isn't CM all about the realism? I would much rather have the ROF "knob" turned up and be able to drain the gun dry if I didn't watch target arcs, etc... than to have the game "dumbed down" by limiting the ROF. At least turn up that ROF knob to max when the enemy are within 300-400m or so when using the "target" command. I would want that 2.5k of ammo go to dry in 8 turns or so of full-on firing within that range. That is realistic. Harassing fire... that's "target light"... Even for a HMG, I agree that ammo conservation is important. So are range considerations. A mg team's reaction and thus ROF to a group of guys at 700m is going to be a lot different than their reaction to a group of guys at 300m. The game does a poor job of really turning up the ROF in these situations. I am not advocating full on HMG belt dumps in any case. I am advocating more rapid intervals of short bursts. Not 10-15 seconds between bursts... so ineffective for what was a really scary weapon. That goes for any HMG position. Such a low rate of fire for an HMG position is rediculous when the enemy are only a few hundred meters away, especially with the accuracy limitations and lack of suppression...

I'll go with that, too. It's still a far cry from where we are currently. Also interesting is the "small area of dispersion" mentioned by the report above. Looks like we don't have that either.

Yup! They subsequently went to fiberglass.

So. That means between 8 and 9rounds fired every second, over the entire minute, for a mg42 hmg. Continuously. And that is the sustained fire rate but with breaks for barrel swaps? Makes sense to me. And it's a far cry from the current state of affairs.

Yes. Well, the section of the belt we can see at the beginning is 20ish rounds. I should have said 75-100rds to be safe.

I agree. I think that the gun was under most circumstances fired with a reasonable Rof and at the end of the belt had the barrel quick changed.