Faelwolf Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Found this on YouTube and thought I'd share. Don't know if it's been posted somewhere before. U.S. War Dept. training film with some good info. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trooper117 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Nice find! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajorProblem Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Now what about adding jamming machine guns back into the game that would add a new great feature in the game and dependent which machine is in use will determine the chances of mechanical jams and faults. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 Interesting: "...makes indirect fire possible..." "...at 500 yards range the beaten zone is 140 yards long and half a yard wide..." The film makes it clear how unusual most CM2 scenarios are since we rarely have the sort of long LOS that the HMG's are designed for. And I wonder if we can even use indirect fire as depicted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placebo Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 I do miss jamming in CM2 - I understand the idea that mg's have been made less lethal to simulate this, but it was better having it shown as a jam and a good chance for pinned troops to make a break for cover. (Also changing out the barrels on some mg's would also be a good addition) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronCat60 Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 Great find! I love it when someone finds these little gems. It informs me of the training doctrine used back then and motivates me to use the information in playing the game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macisle Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Thanks for posting that, Faelwolf! Great stuff and his channel looks like it has more good vids. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faelwolf Posted September 24, 2014 Author Share Posted September 24, 2014 Yeah, Zeno is my "go to" guy for anything WW2 film related, so far as training films etc. He's a great resource for era-made stuff, and along with the info, some of the training films are both entertaining and unintentionally humorous (at least by today's standards) I first found him looking for training films for WW2 aircraft, trying to get a leg-up in Air Warrior (and later, Aces high) If you know your weapons, you can also spot how they gloss over some of the weapon shortcomings in some of the films as well. Obviously, you don't want a training film that says "this gun/plane/whatever sucks, good luck" but I get a smile when I see some of the shine-ola going on at times. Look for Ronald Reagan in a number of them, iirc he did a lot of work for the Army Signal Corps during the war, along with a lot of other B list actors, and a few A list ones as well. Also, if anyone's missed it, there is a great parody of these films on DVD, (modern made) called "Military Intelligence and You" that is especially fun if you've seen a lot of these originals The blind/area fire in the film does show a relatively minor shortcoming in CMBN, I think the LoS restriction we have lessens the abilities of the guns a little. Perhaps we could have blind fire at reduced effectiveness or something. But, I am no programmer, and it certainly isn't a game-breaker for me. Given the requirements for pre-planning and placement pointed out in the film, I should think any blind fire capability would have to be for defensive positions or initial placement, and lost if the guns are moved. So again, not that big a deal to not have it at all in my view. I noticed that after the guns were moved up, they relied on LoS for targeting, which we have modeled quite well with the area fire command. The improvements in V2 to machine guns gave us better penetration and suppression effects, which I think better models the beaten zone than V1 did. So no complaints. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Given the requirements for pre-planning and placement pointed out in the film, I should think any blind fire capability would have to be for defensive positions or initial placement, and lost if the guns are moved... Good point. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0813537/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl Was hoping I could find the movie on youtube. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger73 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0813537/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl Was hoping I could find the movie on youtube. Please post here when you do! Belongs next to my copy of "Iron Sky". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franko Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Excellent vid, thanks. Now I'm inspired to do a battalion level engagement! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Malan2 Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Am I the only one who thinks that indirect fire with Mgs would not enhance the game? I think in rl it wasn't (I believe) done on the fly very much, and would count as pre-scenario preparatory damage, like the really heavy artillery barrages. Also, due to major player advantages it would tend to gamey exploitation needing all sorts of rules about where and when you can't use it. Just my 2p.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Am I the only one who thinks that indirect fire with Mgs would not enhance the game? I think in rl it wasn't (I believe) done on the fly very much, and would count as pre-scenario preparatory damage, like the really heavy artillery barrages. Also, due to major player advantages it would tend to gamey exploitation needing all sorts of rules about where and when you can't use it. Just my 2p.... Agree. HMG's being able to area-fire through smoke would be far more useful and realistic ( and gamey ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franko Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Nice find! Also, the attacker rarely gets much setup room. In reality, there is much more depth to the attacker's zone. In this video, you can see that there's a lot going on behind the rifleman's attack position. F 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbarbaric Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 the video is great find and really interesting but, correct me if i am wrong, this is only kind of manual and the real combat is much more confusing affair. it looks to me like it is trying to morale boost the rookie troops before going to war. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faelwolf Posted September 29, 2014 Author Share Posted September 29, 2014 Yes, this is a training film, designed to teach basic tactics of offensive employment for heavy machine guns. All training films are staged, the old ones more entertainingly so, by our standards. Yes, there is a certain "Rah Rah" factor as well, but that's to be expected. You don't teach your troops that they're a bunch of losers and everyone's going to die! Despite the fact that no plan survives first contact with the enemy, it's good to have a plan, and a basic knowledge of how to employ weapons. And yes, they do gloss over the shortcomings, some of them try to overlook glaring shortcomings. Try this one, and notice how they try to pass over the ineffectiveness of the 37mm against tanks. (It's also a pretty good overview of infantry weapons of the U.S. in WW2) Notice they don't ignore it's weakness against frontal armor, they try to trivialize it. And frangible grenades?! A bunch of volatile, self igniting liquid carried in your pocket in a glass bottle designed to break. I'll pass, thanks! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoMac Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 Excellent vid, thanks. Now I'm inspired to do a battalion level engagement! Yeah, Franko, and it really works great using your 'True Combat'-House Rules...Not :-) Joe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoMac Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 Yes, as Faelwolf has pointed out...Real Combat is much more confusing, but that's not the point...The Video still gives you an understanding of what should be done under ideal circumstances, and ofcourse, giving a Moral Boost to help with the War Effort. the video is great find and really interesting but, correct me if i am wrong, this is only kind of manual and the real combat is much more confusing affair. it looks to me like it is trying to morale boost the rookie troops before going to war. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletpoint Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 A machinegun seems to be able to suppress a huge area in real life, whereas in the game, it can only suppress one square of 8 metres (plus a tiny bit in the adjecent ones). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.