German Heavy Machine Guns

[Erwin]

Agreed,  But am thinking of the huge number of times one has to attack a village/town or other objective which happens to be situated in a dip in the ground (or behind a berm) so one cannot get LOS to it via  FO or HMG (or any other long range weapon).   

In reality communities are built on higher ground.  All the communities built on lower ground would be subject to flooding and how does the sewage flow away?  That's why buildings in RL are on higher ground.  

Am simply making the observation that designers like to make things more difficult by using terrain tricks - which is fine...  but, it means that longer range weapons are often nullified (or suicidal to deploy).

[chuckdyke]

8 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Agreed,  But am thinking of the huge number of times one has to attack a village/town or other objective which happens to be situated in a dip in the ground (or behind a berm) so one cannot get LOS to it via  FO or HMG (or any other long range weapon).   

In reality communities are built on higher ground.  All the communities built on lower ground would be subject to flooding and how does the sewage flow away?  That's why buildings in RL are on higher ground.  

Am simply making the observation that designers like to make things more difficult by using terrain tricks - which is fine...  but, it means that longer range weapons are often nullified (or suicidal to deploy).

The Road to Nijmegen first battle. The Tripod mounted Browning MG I found the sweet spot for this weapon, and it meant to pull it back towards the wheatfield near the road. I left it with the Company HQ who was in contact with the Platoon HQ and later the FO. In this fashion the weapon was used like light artillery. Germans in buildings and behind hedges were easily suppressed. There is a trick with the move tool you can use to find the best position for these weapons.

[Erwin]

17 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

There is a trick with the move tool you can use to find the best position for these weapons.

Trust me I spend a lot of time examining LOS using dozens if not hundreds of waypoints all over the place.  Sometimes one can get long range LOS on a typical map.  Usually not.  GeorgeMC is very good about this.  Am playing one of his CMSF2 campaigns and he has allowed for 2Km-3Km LOS so the ATGM's can be used as advertised. 

 

[Artkin]

My advice was directed particuarly for urban fighting, in the open I am much more liberal with their use. You can safely get away with many firing positions close to the front

[chuckdyke]

5 hours ago, Erwin said:

Trust me I spend a lot of time examining LOS using dozens if not hundreds of waypoints all over the place.  Sometimes one can get long range LOS on a typical map.  Usually not.  GeorgeMC is very good about this.  Am playing one of his CMSF2 campaigns and he has allowed for 2Km-3Km LOS so the ATGM's can be used as advertised. 

 

Ok if you're happy my method is very much foolproof. Use it for FO's HMGs Mortars and the like. But spotting is relative, and a rifleman may get LOS but later you put an HMG there he doesn't.

 

[Erwin]

18 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

But spotting is relative, and a rifleman may get LOS but later you put an HMG there he doesn't.

Yes, that happens a lot with FO's, snipers and other units.  A scout finds a great LOS spot for taking out an enemy, but when you move an HMG/FO/Sniper even a tank to that exact same location, they cannot get LOS - even after several minutes of "chatting" between units.  However, other times that tactic does work...  That sort of inconsistency is frustrating for the player but maybe reflects RL.  Generally, after about 15K hours playing the game since CMSF was released I find the LOS system to be a bit wanky as it is definitely not WYSIWYG.  Have often termed CM as "The Game of Determining LOS".  However, one learns to accept and work around the flaws and the game is no less enjoyable.

[Combatintman]

On 1/28/2023 at 9:58 PM, Erwin said:

In reality communities are built on higher ground.  All the communities built on lower ground would be subject to flooding and how does the sewage flow away?  That's why buildings in RL are on higher ground.  

Water is a basic need - I think you'll find that the earliest settlements were close to water courses.

[chuckdyke]

5 hours ago, Erwin said:

Yes, that happens a lot with FO's, snipers and other units.  A scout finds a great LOS spot for taking out an enemy, but when you move an HMG/FO/Sniper even a tank to that exact same location, they cannot get LOS - even after several minutes of "chatting" between units.  However, other times that tactic does work...  That sort of inconsistency is frustrating for the player but maybe reflects RL.  Generally, after about 15K hours playing the game since CMSF was released I find the LOS system to be a bit wanky as it is definitely not WYSIWYG.  Have often termed CM as "The Game of Determining LOS".  However, one learns to accept and work around the flaws and the game is no less enjoyable.

I use the move tool and move the camera to POV if I can see the white dot, I know I am in linear or open danger zone. LOS also depends on the soft factors, using it as a tool where you can depend on for 100 % is futile.

[chuckdyke]

4 hours ago, Combatintman said:

Water is a basic need - I think you'll find that the earliest settlements were close to water courses.

Burger like in Hamburger is related to the word Berg which means mountain of hill. Once you build a settlement on top of it the settlers were called Burgers, French word Bourgeoisie is also derived from it. The early settlers in the Netherlands made man made hills called Terpen which you still can find in the province of Frisia. Yes, people liked to live on elevations real or manmade.

Edited January 30, 2023 by chuckdyke

[RockinHarry]

On 1/4/2023 at 11:20 PM, Bulletpoint said:

I find the opposite - that they are no use at all at 1000m+, not even for suppression.

hey Bullet! I was mainly refering to mentioned target area fire and leading target method. As said I claim at least 2-3 times enemy losses with this one. Still big ammo expenditure but I get more enemies down per bullet. Direct fire still sucks in all circumstances.

[Bulletpoint]

10 hours ago, RockinHarry said:

hey Bullet! I was mainly refering to mentioned target area fire and leading target method. As said I claim at least 2-3 times enemy losses with this one. Still big ammo expenditure but I get more enemies down per bullet. Direct fire still sucks in all circumstances.

Yes, maybe I just didn't understand your technique... But I upvoted your post because I thought it was interesting that you used these things in a completely different way than I do.

Are you playing real-time since you can lead a target continually by 50 metres? I think that would be very difficult to do in turn based mode.

I'm guessing that you say direct fire mode (letting them spot and engage on their own) sucks because they often won't spot anything at those ranges?

[Chibot Mk IX]

3 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Yes, maybe I just didn't understand your technique... But I upvoted your post because I thought it was interesting that you used these things in a completely different way than I do.

Are you playing real-time since you can lead a target continually by 50 metres? I think that would be very difficult to do in turn based mode.

I'm guessing that you say direct fire mode (letting them spot and engage on their own) sucks because they often won't spot anything at those ranges?

I think I used the same tactic if I understand RockinHarry correctly.  this tactic also works in turn based mode. Usually an infantry squad will advance 50-60m (quick order) on an open terrain in a min. on the other hand please just note that, at long range HMG team might need 15s-30s to finish the aim then pull the trigger.

 

AF can still be very effective on disruption and causing casualty at very long range, even you AF target the incorrect action spot it can still cause the damage to the adjacent spots.  

Edited February 2, 2023 by Chibot Mk IX

[RockinHarry]

11 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Yes, maybe I just didn't understand your technique... But I upvoted your post because I thought it was interesting that you used these things in a completely different way than I do.

Are you playing real-time since you can lead a target continually by 50 metres? I think that would be very difficult to do in turn based mode.

I'm guessing that you say direct fire mode (letting them spot and engage on their own) sucks because they often won't spot anything at those ranges?

Single player only. Never even attempted RT yet (and I won´t). I give the HMG gunners direct target vs. map area orders and adapt to circumstances if needed later. The nature of MG34/42 long range plunging fire and overshooting when letting the gunners do their own thing, requires to nail their fires on fixed positions on the map. Lead the fire 30-50m before any enemy moving or static targets and have fun! No overshooting or plunging way off the targets anymore.
 

8 hours ago, Chibot Mk IX said:

I think I used the same tactic if I understand RockinHarry correctly.  this tactic also works in turn based mode. Usually an infantry squad will advance 50-60m (quick order) on an open terrain in a min. on the other hand please just note that, at long range HMG team might need 15s-30s to finish the aim then pull the trigger.

 

AF can still be very effective on disruption and causing casualty at very long range, even you AF target the incorrect action spot it can still cause the damage to the adjacent spots.  

I experience no unusual delays with target area fire modes. Off course bits of depends on soft factors and I always keep the HMG team leader nearby, helping with spotting (binocs) and fire corrections etc. This method also gives no mercy for prone laying enemies. But as said it works best if at longer ranges (400- ~1200m). If placed in KH position they can be devastating and fear little from enemy return fires.

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, RockinHarry said:

Single player only. Never even attempted RT yet (and I won´t). I give the HMG gunners direct target vs. map area orders and adapt to circumstances if needed later. The nature of MG34/42 long range plunging fire and overshooting when letting the gunners do their own thing, requires to nail their fires on fixed positions on the map. Lead the fire 30-50m before any enemy moving or static targets and have fun! No overshooting or plunging way off the targets anymore.

Ok, I will have to try it out. Normally, I find that it's much more effective if my units spot their targets on their own than if I do area fire, because then they will spread out the fire over many squares, but maybe I'm wrong.

[RockinHarry]

29 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Ok, I will have to try it out. Normally, I find that it's much more effective if my units spot their targets on their own than if I do area fire, because then they will spread out the fire over many squares, but maybe I'm wrong.

Thanks! Let us know about your own findings with this method then please! Yeah, there´s cases when direct fire can still be superior (small target arcs and massed enemies that remain on the move for longer times.) The main issue to deal with for HMg34/42 (and other non german MG´s) is that the tripod´s stability and resulting accuracy even at longer ranges ain´t modeled in game at all. You´ll almost always overshoot 80-90% of a burst over the target. This is what the "leading the target/area" is meant for, bringing most of the burst into "target" (the area where the enemy is or moves into shortly later). Of course the targeted area is three AS wide with bits of random selection. But all of the bursts hit the same horizontal plane, with little overshooting (into depth and beyond the target). If a target is or remains in place, sooner or later a burst will hit the desired area with a good number of bullets (the actual strength of MG34/42). Lying prone won´t help the target much here (unless below the ground terrain mesh or behind hard cover). Best effect is still applied on a moving mass target and a single HMG can wreck havoc on it, even at long range. But the reality of course is, you rarely get such great opportunies with either the map not beeing large enough, the enemy attacking from unexpected directions or the HMG not having key holed positions available. So it´s not a swiss army knife for every situation. Constant feeding with ammo is another prerequisite for making the most of any these opportunities.

[Bulletpoint]

4 minutes ago, RockinHarry said:

Thanks! Let us know about your own findings with this method then please! Yeah, there´s cases when direct fire can still be superior (small target arcs and massed enemies that remain on the move for longer times.) The main issue to deal with for HMg34/42 (and other non german MG´s) is that the tripod´s stability and resulting accuracy even at longer ranges ain´t modeled in game at all. You´ll almost always overshoot 80-90% of a burst over the target. This is what the "leading the target/area" is meant for, bringing most of the burst into "target" (the area where the enemy is or moves into shortly later). Of course the targeted area is three AS wide with bits of random selection. But all of the bursts hit the same horizontal plane, with little overshooting (into depth and beyond the target). If a target is or remains in place, sooner or later a burst will hit the desired area with a good number of bullets (the actual strength of MG34/42). Lying prone won´t help the target much here (unless below the ground terrain mesh or behind hard cover). Best effect is still applied on a moving mass target and a single HMG can wreck havoc on it, even at long range. But the reality of course is, you rarely get such great opportunies with either the map not beeing large enough, the enemy attacking from unexpected directions or the HMG not having key holed positions available. So it´s not a swiss army knife for every situation. Constant feeding with ammo is another prerequisite for making the most of any these opportunities.

Ok, I understand your idea now. My experience has been that at 800m+, even if you do area fire, the bursts are so slow and spread out, that it's very unlikely I hit anything.

I had one PBEM where I was the US attacker crossing open ground, and my opponent had 2x German HMG firing at about 800m. I found they caused no casualties, and I was even able to maneuver, as they couldn't produce enough suppression effect to stop me at that range. Was surprised how little effect they had, actually.

[RockinHarry]

5 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Ok, I understand your idea now. My experience has been that at 800m+, even if you do area fire, the bursts are so slow and spread out, that it's very unlikely I hit anything.

I had one PBEM where I was the US attacker crossing open ground, and my opponent had 2x German HMG firing at about 800m. I found they caused no casualties, and I was even able to maneuver, as they couldn't produce enough suppression effect to stop me at that range. Was surprised how little effect they had, actually.

Thanks! Understand as well. I´d put my bets on your opponent was using "direct" fire (TacAI self applied) on your troops. If not he was maybe not using correct "leading the target" distance on them. "Ltt" of course can be and usually is different at various ranges (plunging fires), as well as if there´s height differences between both and few other factors. And I forgot mentioning that using a TRP near target area is of big help as well.

Some the things I try applying in my games is using certain weapon systems historical combat techniques. In this case it´s german mass and surprise fire application. Means I try putting at least a platoon´s (2x HMG teams) fire on single target area, guided by its associated HQ team. Here the HMG pair is most effective usually. The more if good soft factors and abundance of ammo comes into play (loading extra ammo from kubels or ammo crates). Part of the tactic is planning for switch positions, in case the enemy does not play to your rules (attacking or moving elsewhere, using smoke etc.) I try keeping some kubels nearby, so I can shift the teams when needed. For that to get work I keep (german) HMG teams understrength (60-70%) by default so they fit into the kubels. Any other carrier of course is equally fine as long as the team fits into the vehicle.

Edited February 3, 2023 by RockinHarry

[Lethaface]

For longer range suppression and or killing power I think the area fire options are indeed great. Getting solid spots is usually an issue at that range as well. However at shorter ranges with solid spots I don't have any complaints about the HMG42/32 accuracy or deadliness.