Gyrene Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 The Soviets had the most developed and widely employed sniper program of WWII, and most of the sniper caused casualties in the war were inflicted by Soviet snipers so... Should the Russians have a better, more expensive form of sharpshooter available in CMBB? Something with a rarity factor, of course, but a shooter that could exceed the 600m limit and have higher stealth numbers and accuracy? Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
securityguard Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 better stealth? the sharp shooters already can run right across a pack of enemy infantry and nearly be unseen. we dont need to make them invisible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted June 24, 2001 Author Share Posted June 24, 2001 Heh, maybe not better stealth. Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Johnson-- Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 I would like it. Many thousands more Russians spent their time in the nasty outback hunting wild game then Germans. But how can you scienceticifly guantify it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted June 24, 2001 Author Share Posted June 24, 2001 Mr. J, at the moment I can only offer you anecdotal evidence, mainly gleaned from numerous History Channel programs who regular make claims similar to my initial thread. Other than that I'd have to dig to find data on the numbers of sharpshooters deployed and the differences in their training (Usually more than "give the best shot the rifle with the scope" as it was done by the other Allies). Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlichtingen Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gyrene: I can only offer you anecdotal evidence, mainly gleaned from numerous History Channel programs who regular make claims similar to my initial thread.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Unfortunately, the History Channel leaves a lot to be desired for accuracy. IIRC all modern sniper programs owe their origins to the Germans. The thing the Russians had was numbers... lots of snipers. I doubt there is any real evidense that their snipers were any more skilled than their German counterparts [ 06-24-2001: Message edited by: Berlichtingen ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpkr Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 Why do I have the feeling this is going to devoolve to the same line of arguments between Tero and the rest of the world (regarding his thoughts on why Finnish soldiers were übertruppen)? Just wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaldaen Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Berlichtingen: Unfortunately, the History Channel leaves a lot to be desired for accuracy. IIRC all modern sniper programs owe their origins to the Germans. The thing the Russians had was numbers... lots of snipers. I doubt there is any real evidense that their snipers were any more skilled than their German counterparts [ 06-24-2001: Message edited by: Berlichtingen ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Perhaps just make snipers slightly cheaper for the Russians to reflect their numbers? 1-4 points depending upon their training/fitness level? Just My 2 Cents, Jaldaen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 >Why do I have the feeling this is going to >devoolve to the same line of arguments >between Tero and the rest of the world >(regarding his thoughts on why Finnish >soldiers were übertruppen)? There is NO base for arguments here. The most successfull sniper in history, Simo Häyhä, is Finnish after all. He racked the most confirmed kills of all the WWII snipers, propably even of all the snipers in history. And the Red Army did start the sniper program after their experiences with Finnish snipers (not just Simo mind you) during the Winter War. That being the case I really must point out that not only the Red Army snipers deserve special bonuses. What is there to debate ? >Just wondering. Have no fear. The Finnish troops respected the Soviet snipers very much. There was this one sniper who always killed with a shot between the eyes. His undoing was the fact that he was TOO accurate. He shot a prowling HMG gunner between the eyes who survived the shot and hosed the sniper with his Maxim. He never moved when the fire was approaching his position. That is how cool he was. Mind you, the Finnish soldiers respected the Red Army soldiers as individual fighters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumvir Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 How the hell do you survive a frontal shot between the eyes without being ubertruppen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted June 24, 2001 Author Share Posted June 24, 2001 Yes, before this thing does go down the drain, my intention was to reflect the Soviet's greater availability of formally trained snipers compared to the other combatants of WWII. To deny the abilities of any other sharpshooters (Even uber-duper-super finns) was not my intention. If the Russians did not have more trained snipers than the Germans as I have been led to believe, then leave the system as is. Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ari Maenpaa Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrSpkr: Why do I have the feeling this is going to devoolve to the same line of arguments between Tero and the rest of the world (regarding his thoughts on why Finnish soldiers were übertruppen)? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Exactly when or where has someone claimed that the Finnish soldiers were übertruppen? I think the basis for those arguments were on totally different perspectives. If someone's former knowledge of the Russo-Finnish wars are mainly based on Soviet and other NON-Finnish sources, then of course, the information from Finnish POV may sound like übertruppen propaganda. Still that in itself doesn't necessarily make it false. After all, wasn't the USSR the übermaster of propaganda? And then again, sometimes Tero seems to be throwing "hot potatoes" on the forum Ari Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 If I recall, BTS has said that sharpshooters in the game are not to be confused with snipers. Sharpshooters as they are modeled are similar to individual infantry men setup to harass the enemy as they advance. Snipers are individuals (or teams) who go after higher priority targets and not necessarily at the battlefield. If you can get the search engine to work I recall a thread a month or two ago that debated this very point. Basically, snipers and sharpshooters are two different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 The point is moot because it can handle sharpshooters of varying quality and quantity. Want a ubersniper, but a crack or elite one. Want a dosen dunderheads with guns, buy a green sharpshooter. Snipers may be modelled in CM:BB according to BTS on a post quite some time ago. They are far different from sharpshooters, who are just guys that are good with a rifle and tasked to take out the enemy from longer range. If they get included, you can model the difference by choosing a different quality. As for who was the best sniper, everyone knows that the US had the best shots, they just never bothered bragging about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Johnson-- Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 So is an Elite Sharpshooter as good as a Sniper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Triumvir: How the hell do you survive a frontal shot between the eyes without being ubertruppen?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I've heard that same story. MG gunner and all. Only the shot was into forehead, passed right between the brain lobes. Surviving a shot like that supposedly gives hell of a lot of bragging rights.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted June 24, 2001 Share Posted June 24, 2001 Since we have not seen the sniper, we have no idea how good it will be in comparison to a sharpshooter in the game. However, if you want to simulate one, try an elite sharpshooter. It is just that instead of giving the Finnish or the Russians or the Germans a bonus for being ubertruppen with brass conjones, you can use the mechanism provided in the game to simulate different levels of quality. In the US in 1869 (I think) a man working on a construction site had a 6 cm steel rod 1 meter in legth blown through his head, entering below the eye socket and exiting from the top of his skull. He was back on the job in a few weeks, but he was prone to mood swings for ever after. There is a book written by the psyiologist who studied him that was fairly well known. The details are a bit fuzzy as to his exact brain condition, but that is not a happy experience at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted June 25, 2001 Author Share Posted June 25, 2001 IIRC there a was story in the Guiness Book of Records about a guy in the Spanish Civil War that was shot 3 times in the head and still hobbled back to his lines quite a few miles away. Simo Häyhä's kill count is impressive, but I wouldn't go as far as touting him as the greatest sniper ever, as most of his kills were made well under 400 yards in terrain he was intimately familiar with, and his word was good enough as confirmation, this is not to say that he could be lying about his kills, but US snipers in Vietnam did not get credit for a kill unless an Officer witnessed the kill or the body was confirmed by a recon party. That explains the relative "low" kill numbers in Vietnam many other hits would be too dangerous to confirm, not only that they were hunting a much more elusive prey in terrain they were foreign to at much longer ranges. Could you imagine what Carlos Hathcock's kill numbers would be if the war was in his native Arkansas? Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gyrene: Could you imagine what Carlos Hathcock's kill numbers would be if the war was in his native Arkansas? Gyrene<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> He'd probably have a few more 2500 yard long kills. 93 confirmed and 300 probables, the man sure could shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 A friend of mine who is an alternate sniper laughed at 2500 yard kills. Even today with match .300 Win Mag (don't get all strung out about .50 BMG, it is not accurate enough at long range) sniper shots are rarely, if ever, attempted at over a thousand meters. Some specialists in Vietnam practiced ultra long range sniping (1400 meters) but they were working in a unique environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 If you read the book TUMBLEDOWN (or watch the movie) it is about a Scots Guards officer who had part of his brain blown out by an Argentinian with an FN at close range. He lived, but was invalided out (and had to fight for compensation). I forget what percentage of his brain was "traumatically amputated" but it was a horrifying number, and he made a reasonable recovery from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: A friend of mine who is an alternate sniper laughed at 2500 yard kills. Even today with match .300 Win Mag (don't get all strung out about .50 BMG, it is not accurate enough at long range) sniper shots are rarely, if ever, attempted at over a thousand meters. Some specialists in Vietnam practiced ultra long range sniping (1400 meters) but they were working in a unique environment.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hathcock did it with a scoped M2. It was only 1 shot too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by panzerwerfer42: Hathcock did it with a scoped M2. It was only 1 shot too.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If he did make a 2500 yard kill, it was a once in a lifetime shot, I doubt he shot regularly over 1000 meters unless he was in Vietnam with the Marines, who did have a long range sniping program. Even then, like I said, ranged topped out at 1400 meters for M2HB machineguns with scopes, and often needed several shots even with that. However,, before everyone gets excited and starts threads that says my Finnish (or German or Russian, or Lithuanian) snipers should be able to shot at 2500 meters also! Most sharpshooters and snipers work at 400 meters or less with 800 meters being considered a long range harrassing shot rather than a true. If, however, you can come up with some respectable publication that records this guy shooting a bunch of confirmed kills at 2500 meters, then I will admit that I am wrong and sell my Garand. I can't hit dick at over 400 meters even with a scope. (Maybe, if I put it on sand bags, had match ammo, and something better than my old dog leg 4x I could. Not otherwise). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 Carlos Hathcock was on a hill at Duc Pho when he made a 2500 yard kill.He shot a member of the viet cong with a 50 caliber machine gun. the heavy bullet allows for accuracy well beyond 2000 yards. And the cyclic rate is also slow enough for single shots to be fired. He pioneered the use of this weapon as a sniper platform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 oh yea, he didn't make to many of them he was mainly flushing them out for a patrol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts