Jump to content

Deployment of Heavy machineguns on the Attack movie


Recommended Posts

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 ;) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

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...