Jump to content

Picking up SMG


Recommended Posts

I have been told this has been discussed to death, is handled historically correct and wont be changed by BF.

So naturally I have to start a new thread to right a great wrong. Here it comes.

I am annoyed to the extreme when I lose a leader in rifle heavy american squads because it does not only mean the loss of a useful guy but only of the mostly single SMG making "assault" teams a lot less effective.

The SMG is gone for good since it isnt picked up except by soldiers armed with sideguns usually not found up front and not often used as assault Teams even when the get the SMG.

In a game where AT weapons are picked up every time by every soldier I think SMGs should at least be taken as a secondary weapon.

Given many Pictures of german soldiers in russia with russian SMGs i guess it was not uncommon to swap a rifle against a SMG even if you had to rely on the enemy for supply.

BTW why cant my GIs drive abandonde Kübelwagen that could be put into action by any german soldier immediatly.

The game is completly unplayable with these shortcomings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have been told this has been discussed to death, is handled historically correct and wont be changed by BF.

So naturally I have to start a new thread to right a great wrong.

The game is completly unplayable with these shortcomings.

So, I take it you no longer play the game? :rolleyes:

Noba.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SMG is gone for good since it isnt picked up except by soldiers armed with sideguns usually not found up front and not often used as assault Teams even when the get the SMG.

I do remember that my infantry did pick up SMGs (and other weapons) quite regularly. Typically any rifleman would pick up an SMG or LMG or AT weapon after giving buddy aid. However, I have noticed in the few times I have played CMRT that it doesn't seem to be quite as common (if at all). Maybe the 3.0 patch did something to stop this from happening, which would be a backwards step.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I had my US squad moving across a wheatfield. The men were talking. Brooklyn was telling the fng about how to spot German mines. Suddenly, a shot rang out and Sgt. Johnson, the squad leader since Sicily, collapsed.

Ziggy ran over with Mitch to give buddy aid. Brooklyn swung his BAR towards the suspected sniper hide and ripped off a quick couple of mags. Fng kept his head down like he'd been told. O'Hara, Kansas, Gus, and Lady's Man spread out and tried to spot the Kraut.

Johnson didn't make it.

Ziggy looked at Mitch and said, "I'm gonna grab the Tommie gun. I think it's better than my Garand. See if you can find some magazines."

Mitch shook his head and replied, "It's disrespectful to loot the dead." Then he walked over to the others.

Ziggy joined them a minute later, Thompson held casually in his hands.

Brooklyn took it in, especially the not quite dry blood on the barrel. The vein in his forehead started to pulse.

Kansas sidled up to Fng, grabbed his sleeve, and pulled him out of the way. The squad silently stared at Ziggy.

"What? C'mon guys! This is a better weapon!" Ziggy proclaimed.

"But it ain't yours," Brooklyn gritted out from between clenched teeth.

Ziggy's eyes widened.

Brooklyn brought the BAR up and, in a flash, emptied 20 rounds of .30 '06 M2 ball into Ziggy. Turning, he asked, "Anyone got a problem?" They all mutely shook their heads.

I've never had any other of my men try to filch someone else's personal firearm. Is that how it happened with your guys?

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So C3PO, are you now saying CM should not allow Weapons to be picked-up...If so, I would agree :-)

Postfux, I think you've been playing to many 1st Person Shooter Games...Between picking-up weapons, Driving enemy vehicles. Next-up you will be asking why can't we change into enemy uniforms to infiltrate enemy lines :-(

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to own a Garand, and I can guarantee you that I would not want to tote both a Garand and a Thompson (and two kinds of ammo) around any battlefield, it would be one, or the other. Given that a Garand fires 30-06 rounds, and is a very accurate semi-automatic rifle, I would personally rather have a Garand than a Thompson in many situations. The Garand was easily the best battle rifle of WW2.

But, yea, I could see some scenarios (city fighting, for example) where it would make sense to drop the Garand and pick up the Thompson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not being able to pick up the smg goes against my common sense but I do also agree that the other weapons still have higher priority in most situations. (you rarely get withing effective range) My point of view however is heavily influanced by Finnish war history where a good smg plays an important role as well as looting the enemy (and fallen comrades). Then again it is also a known fact that while the finnish soldier might not have been as higly trained as other contemporary armies in the europe, they made up with improvisation and agrarian pragmatism. And they also got most of their heavy weapons from their enemies because of necessity.

Edit: I also find it odd that people dont consider that what ever the regulations or good conduct (not looting your fallen friend) the survival of the individual and the remaining fellow fighters often goes before anything else (at least it should!). therefore if the smg is demanded by the situation then i find it very hard to believe that soldiers had not done it (looting or what ever you want to call it). In the context of cm however I dont think this is so important but I just can't agree with the some of the reasonings that people throw around here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC, most 82 Abn officers opted for the Garand (from Nordyke's books) for their overall range and effectiveness. I know Gavin carried one...it's in the picture of him loading up for Holland, and other pics of him in Belguim. Pics show Rueben Tucker of the 504th carrying an M1 folding stock carbine into Sicily. But that's officers. I'm just a hobby shooter, but it's surprising to me how uncomfortable I am shooting another guy's weapon, even if it's the same make/model. But I have no idea how it would be in combat. Having fired a Garand, I think I'd keep it, but who's to say that could change quickly in the heat of the moment. Depending on the situation, I suppose.

On a related note, weren't GI's personally responsible for their assigned weapon, so that at the end of the day, assuming you weren't hit or KIA or it was destroyed, you were on the hook for it if you lost or abandoned it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a fundamental here that those that feel soldiers should be able to pick up the personal weapon of another are missing.

A soldier is issued a personal weapon to suit his expected role. He will receive training on this weapon and in a perfect world may even get to zero his weapon. More importantly he will be issued webbing gear in line with his weapon. His magazine pouches will be designed for the weapon he is issued.

How many MP-40 magazines will fit into a Kar98 pouch (answer none ! )

He will be issued loose or boxed rounds and a cleaning kit for his issued weapon that he will be carrying in his webbing.

So it's not just a matter of picking up a dropped weapon of a differing type, and carrying on. Does he switch his webbing with that of his fallen comrade - if he does so he will then need to swap the contents of his gear or lose his personal equipment and items, all this while under fire of course.

And this is before we even consider whether the weapon to be picked up is damaged, covered in blood, or whether you might actually be more worried about trying to save your buddies life.

The battlefield is not a spreadsheet !

P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never had any other of my men try to filch someone else's personal firearm. Is that how it happened with your guys?

Unluckily, no. I could respect this behavior.

Mine are only mumbling about weapon cleaning sets, lack of stopping power of an automatic .45, strange things about 1st person shooters and are looking in another direction. Some even go so far as to say posing doesnt win battles.

Are you using a mod or do I have to buy an upgrade?

Your story is also explaining why the BAR is free for taking as soon as Brooklyn is down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a game where AT weapons are picked up every time by every soldier I think SMGs should at least be taken as a secondary weapon.

Given many Pictures of german soldiers in russia with russian SMGs i guess it was not uncommon to swap a rifle against a SMG even if you had to rely on the enemy for supply.

The Germans used Russian SMGs on an official basis. How many pictures have you seen of any footslogger carrying both an SMG and his battle rifle?

The game is completly unplayable with these shortcomings.

Oh ho-ho ho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'To right a great wrong'... lol!

C'mon mate. Not picking up an smg is hardly game breaking or wrong.

In reality, a rifle has more hitting power and is a man stopper. SMG's have lower powered rounds and are only useful in very close contact.

As for driving around in a Kubel?... 'Posing' doesn't win battles :)

There is a fundamental here that those that feel soldiers should be able to pick up the personal weapon of another are missing.

P

LMGs get picked up nearly every time, AT weapons get picked up nearly every time. The game features this behavior only not for SMGs since they are considered equal to rifles.

Every argument claiming the SMG is not as versatile as a rifle and a specialized weapon actually supports my point as long as the squad is full of versatile weapons and loosing its only specialized one.

To my knowledge at least on the eastern front soldiers would often take SMGs not issued to them initially. I guess in bocage country some short range firepower was regarded usefull so having one short barrelled automatic wasnt a bad idea historically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I notice about Thompsons in American and British squads is they go through ammo fast and its not always easy to resupply as not many have .45 cals ammo and alot of times the trucks, jeeps and Bren carriers don't have .45 cal.

Your pixel troops always use full auto even though the Tommy gun can be fired semi auto.

The ammo pouch is a very good point. I don't think they had the same sort of quick release webbing in use today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LMGs get picked up nearly every time, AT weapons get picked up nearly every time. The game features this behavior only not for SMGs since they are considered equal to rifles.

I have no idea if the reason you purport is why the games is the way it is.

I would argue however that it is due to rifles and SMG's being personal weapons, while LMG's or larger are generally considered support weapons that are far more important to the squad as a whole than a single SMG.

As for your point with regard to soldiers on the eastern front taking SMGs I would be interested to know how many troops actually swapped their issued weapon for a SMG in the heat of battle, particularly if you are referring to German use of Red Army SMG's. I would suspect very few were snatched up mid battle.

Bottom line I'm winning this argument because Battlefront happen to agree with me (or vice versa if you prefer). :D

P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for your point with regard to soldiers on the eastern front taking SMGs I would be interested to know how many troops actually swapped their issued weapon for a SMG in the heat of battle, particularly if you are referring to German use of Red Army SMG's. I would suspect very few were snatched up mid battle.

P

On top of that and in general, Friendly or Enemy Weapons are usually picked-up after the Battles end. These weapons are then re-designated and re-distributed back in service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea if the reason you purport is why the games is the way it is.

I would argue however that it is due to rifles and SMG's being personal weapons, while LMG's or larger are generally considered support weapons that are far more important to the squad as a whole than a single SMG.

As for your point with regard to soldiers on the eastern front taking SMGs I would be interested to know how many troops actually swapped their issued weapon for a SMG in the heat of battle, particularly if you are referring to German use of Red Army SMG's. I would suspect very few were snatched up mid battle.

Bottom line I'm winning this argument because Battlefront happen to agree with me (or vice versa if you prefer). :D

P

I think you are wrong about how the game works. A rifleman wont pick up an SMG since rifles and SMGs are considered equal. A crewman armed with a sidegun will pick up both given the chance. A difference between personal and support weapons is not simulated.

Here is what wikipedia - quoting a serious source - says about the Thompson in France: "The gun was prized by those lucky enough to get one and proved itself in the close street fighting that was encountered frequently during the invasion of France. Former Paratrooper David Kenyon Webster in his book Parachute Infantry spoke of the guns being "borrowed" by riflemen from members of the mortar squad for use on patrols behind enemy lines."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is what wikipedia - quoting a serious source - says about the Thompson in France: "The gun was prized by those lucky enough to get one and proved itself in the close street fighting that was encountered frequently during the invasion of France. Former Paratrooper David Kenyon Webster in his book Parachute Infantry spoke of the guns being "borrowed" by riflemen from members of the mortar squad for use on patrols behind enemy lines."

Well as far as I'm concerned that quote supports my position far better than yours. I don't think anyone here will disagree that the SMG was on occasion the right weapon for the job, but that alone does not mean a rifleman would drop his weapon on the battlefield in order to swap it for a SMG, which is the point you raised.

As for borrowing Thompsons from the mortar crew - I have no problem with that having happened, but the whole point is that it would have been a deliberate switch organised long before combat was encountered in a safe area.

You also have to wonder why mortar crews would have been given this "superior" weapon which they would not expect to have to use, when the men at the direct tip of the spear only got rifles ?

P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...