A modest proposal regarding SMG squad and Rates of Fire

[YankeeDog]

The topics of infantry squad ammo load, firepower and ROF have been hotly discussed in the past on this forum, and I think the in-game modeling of ammo loads and firepower has benefited considerably from this discourse. In general, I find that CMBB’s variable squad ammo loads and range-dependent rates of fire are a marked improvement over CMBO’s ‘one-size-fits-all’ system.

However, I think there is still some room for refinement in this small arms firepower and ammo model before we move on to whatever the new game engine will bring us. While I look forward to exciting new features like individual weapon ammo tracking in squads, etc. come CMX2, I am hopeful that there will be a few goodies in CMAK in addition to nice desert landscapes and Desert Rats in shorts.

Specifically, I think the ammo loads and/or short-range rates of fire for infantry squads, and especially SMG squads should be examined a bit more closely.

Here is the in-game situation that originally brought this issue to my attention:

I was playing the Schoenhauser Allee scenario included on the CD as Soviets. For those not familiar with it, this is an urban combat scenario depicting street fighting in Berlin. While advancing my infantry towards the VLs, a German HMG opened fire on my infantry advancing up a wide street from the second floor of a heavy building. Unfortunately for the HMG, I had a SMG platoon (depleted – 4/7 men) advancing through the buildings behind the HMG; one squad of this platoon was only about 50m away from the German HMG when it opened fire, and while presently out of LOS of the HMG, one quick charge across an open courtyard would put this squad into a perfect rear-aspect ambush of the HMG.

Given that I was pretty sure that the HMG was more or less alone, I ordered this SMG squad to charge the HMG from behind and take it out. The sequence of events that followed went like this:

Turn 1: SMG squad charges across courtyard and into the building containing the HMG. It reaches its final waypoint about 11m from the HMG about 50 seconds into the turn and opens fire, getting off one 'shot' before the end of the turn. Since the SMG squad began this turn with a full ammo load, this puts it with 24 ammo at the end of this turn.

Turn 2: Figuring the HMG is pretty much toast, I leave the SMG squad where it is an let it unload on the hapless HMG team. Over the course of this turn, the SMG squad unloads 23 shots on the HMG and four grenades, finally finishing off the HMG at about 55 seconds into the turn. The HMG rotates to face the SMG squad, but never actually manages to get a shot off before being completely eliminated.

So, in one turn, my SMG squad managed to fire off 92% of its small arms ammo, and one hand grenade per squad member. At the time this surprised me as being quite an impressive rate of fire, and I made note of the details but did not further examine the issue. Since then, I have discovered that it is not all that unusual to see SMG squads, either German or Soviet, burn 20 or more ammo ‘points’ out of their full 25 point ammo load in a single turn if engaged in a close-range firefight.

Some time later, I got to thinking about this incident and wondered just how much ammo my SMGers had actually managed to fire off in real world terms. I tried to do some research into what the standard ammo load of a Russian soldier equipped with a PPSh was. Unfortunately, I was not able to uncover this information in my rather limited library. I was, however, able to find several sources quoting the standard load of an MP40 equipped German soldier as 7 magazines. Technically, the MP40 mag carries 32 rounds, but apparently most of the time they were underloaded by a few rounds to reduce wear and tear on the mag spring and reduce jamming problems. Since I had more reliable information on German SMGs, I did the rest of my calculations using German SMG squads as the basis.

If the MP40 mags were loaded to about 30 rounds/mag, this would put the typical German submachinegunner’s ammo load at about 210 rounds. Therefore, each ammo ‘point’ of a German SMG squad’s load should be modeling 210 / 25 or 8.4 rounds of ammo per soldier. As such, in order to fire off 20 ‘ammo points’ in a single turn, each member of a German SMG squad is firing off an average of 168 rounds of ammo, or about 5½ magazines worth.

The MP40 has a theoretical ROF of about 400 rounds/min. Therefore, in order to fire 168 rounds, the actual ‘trigger down’ time works out to about 25 seconds. In order to fire off this many rounds, the submachine gunner will need to change mags 5 times. In a close combat situation, I would guess that 5 seconds is a reasonable estimate of mag change time for an experienced soldier. Therefore, just changing the mags is going to take another 25 seconds.

So we’ve used 50 seconds of time already, and we haven’t even bothered to throw any grenade, take cover to avoid enemy fire, or actually bother to take aim and make sure the bullets are going in the general direction of the enemy, and there are only 10 seconds left in the 1 minute turn for all of these activities. This assumes only 20 ‘ammo points’ per turn – as noted, it is actually not all that uncommon to see even higher rates of fire from SMG squads engaged in close combat.

My point is this: The ROF you see from SMG squads at close range in CMBB might be possible at a firing range with the mags laid out nicely on a table in front of you and no concerns like taking cover, setting aside the gun to throw a grenade, or of pausing for a second to aim. Under close combat conditions, where one has to worry about all these factors, and also the factor of NOT hitting your fellow squadmates, this high an effective ROF strikes me as downright impossible.

The close range rates of fire for squads other then SMG squads may similarly high, but the calculations are much more difficult because of the variety of weapons most other squads carry; SMG squads are simply the easiest case to prove because they are homogeneous in armament. SMG squads are also the most affected by this problem because of their lower standard ‘ammo point’ load and the fact that they tend to be used a lot for close range ambush – the unrealistically high rate of fire further exacerbates their major weakness of limited ammo.

In any event, I respectfully suggest that this issue deserves a second look, and furthermore that a reasonably good solution to this problem might be relatively simple, and hopefully implementable for CMAK – to wit, infantry squads should probably have a maximum rate of fire at close range of about twice ‘normal’ (normal being about 7 ‘shots’/turn). As such, a SMG squad’s ammo consumption would top out at about 60 rounds/turn/soldier, or about 3 1/2 clips per turn in the case of the MP40. This strikes me as a more realistic rate of fire in the confusion of close combat. Belt-fed weapons teams (HMGs, mostly) should probably have their close range ROF kept as it is – a belt-fed weapon can burn through ammo VERY quickly (up to even its cyclic rate) so long as there is an Assistant Gunner to link the belts together (assuming the weapon doesn’t overheat and jam, that is, but my understanding is that CMBB models this – as ROF for MGs goes up, so does the chance of jamming).

Ultimately, it would be nice to see more refinements to the small arms model, but these probably need to wait for the model rewrite. To cite one example, ammo usage for all small arms should probably reach maximum at about 40m. Closer than this, and soldiers start doing things like throwing grenades rather than firing small arms. Closer than 20m, and ammo usage should probably fall noticeably as more grenades and actual grappling and fencing start to take place. As it is now, ammo usage begins to climb from ‘normal’ ROF at about 40m and continues to go up as units get closer right up to point-blank. If nothing else, the danger of hitting a squadmate is going to curtail ROF at extremely close range compared to ROF at slightly longer ranges.

Once again, I am hopeful that this issue can be looked at and tweaked a bit for CMAK. It certainly isn’t a game-killer, but it would be a nice refinement.

Cheers,

YD

[SirReal]

I would just like to point out that everyone that's had some urban fighting training knows that the chances that all of the members in the squad will have firing opportunities at the same time is very low when clearing rooms indoors.

Doors will usually keep the number of people firing at once down to one or two.

Finally, throwing a hand grenade in a reasonably safe manner will force your squadmates to pull back from the door/window while waiting for the blast, so assuming four consecutive grenades that would mean some 12-20 seconds spent doing nothing much.

/SirReal

[dieseltaylor]

Nice analysis and SirReal's point adds extra support. A re-vamp does look in order.

My only other feeling is that perhaps there is an element of fudge in the game to reflect that the infantry are never going to use up all their ammo because they will wish to keep some for counter attacks and " emergencies " . Could it be that the expended ammo is that proportion they are willing to use offensively?

I am sure in all armies there must be guidance on how much to keep back of your load if re-supply is not going to occur with-in the time frame of the action. Any grogs with the info?

[A.E.B]

I believe that the idea that infantry keep a reserve of ammo is bourn out by the game itself.

Infantry don't run out of ammo, they reach a state called low. A unit with a low ammo state rarely fires unless directly threated.

So the ammo counter doesn't represent to full ammo load out of a unit.

Regards

A.E.B

[Redwolf]

I think what we need is "partial burst". Before the CMBB release BFC said they would implement that for CMBB rifle squads to reduce the problem with rifle squad ammo. A burst which doesn't count down a full ammo point and has only partical firepower.

Good points have been made why the SMG squad cannot fire like it in does in CMBB in real life. But just reducing ROF from 7 to - say 4 bursts will leave too much unrealistic opportunity for enemies to slip by a SMG squad, that would be unrealistic, too, some SMG soldier would always be ready to fire.

I think if you give it 3 full bursts each turn and 4 more bursts with 1/2 or 1/3 firepower (and ammo points) things would work out pretty nice, realistic and gameplay-compatible.

[ August 01, 2003, 07:10 AM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[dieseltaylor]

A.E.B

I agree with you remarks. YankeeDogs calculations though are based on treating the ammo load as all potentially expendable in the assault.

I have not looked at the math but if I say the ammo shown is the "available for assault" and it is two-thirds or half of what is actually carried. This would tie in with YankeeDogs observations and show the rate of fire being more realistic in the circumstances outlined.

I think it is an element of fudge factor to produce the right result. We cannot make our soldiers carry out assaults when they realise they would have no defensive firepower left if they did.

If BTS showed soldiers with spare [defensive] ammo no doubt people would complain they could not get them to perform a heroic last attack.

Fair enough say I. Does anybody have any infantry advice on reserving ammo?

[SirReal]

Personally, running out of ammo can come as a surprise. You fire, reload and repeat until you just can't find a full magazine. The exception to this would be suppressive fire -- but we're talking assaults and firefights here.

I know there are folks reading this forum that have been in battle, and a lot of infantry grogs, too. Perhaps they can shed light on how common it was for the individual soldier to keep 'spare' ammo.

/SirReal

[IntelWeenie]

I wasn't Infantry, I was in Intelligence (thus my forum name). Anyway, while in Op. Desert Storm, we had the usual 7 30-rd mags for our M-16s on us and a can of 7.62mm for our M-60 handy at all times. I was on a 6-man Radio DF team, by the way, and we normally deployed out all ALOOONE. :eek: and :cool:

However, when on guard duty, we would each also carry a full bandoleer of ammo (already in mags). I personally also kept a couple extra mags plus about 100 rds in stripper clips in my rucksack. We were well set for '60 ammo, too. We had 3 cases of 4 250-rd cans each. That was carried in a truck, of course! This was all for people that were only supposed to fight to defend ourselves long enough for help to arrive or to run away.

Most infantrymen I've talked to, including my dad (Vietnam-era Marine) and grandfather (327th Glider Inf in N. Afrika and Italy) both said they kept as much ammo on them as they could possibly carry because you never knew when you'd need it.

[YankeeDog]

In regards to "low ammo" and reserving a few rounds for emergencies or whatever:

Carrying more that the 'standard' ammo load was quite common when troops could get their hands on additional ammo. 7 mags of 9mm ammo is not an unduly heavy load, and even with a generous load of grenades and such a soldier certainly could carry another mag or two without unduly encumbering himself.

Furthermore, many soldiers, and especially those with combat experience, tended to pick up secondary firearms for use in emergencies. IOW, at least one of my Russian SMG gunners in the original example probably would have been carrying a Luger picked up of a dead German officer, or a Tokarev he won off a Russian officer in a card game.

Also, Companies and Battalions *did* keep local stashes of extra ammo handy, and platoons sent runners back to get more ammo as needed. This type of ammo resupply could certainly happen over the time frame of your typical CM battle, and is not currently modeled. One runner bringing up a few bandoliers of ammo is not going to bring even one squad back up to full ammo, but it could certainly provide enough ammo for the current 'low ammo' firepower model, even for a whole platoon.

Platoons also also shared ammo among squads - if one squad had been shooting a lot, but another had not yet been engaged, they would divide ammo so everyone had a more equitable load.

Finally, the manual states that the low ammo condition is supposed to simulate, "scrounging of ammo found on the battlefield or taken from fallen comrades," so this gives yet two more sources of ammo other than a soldier's regulation load-out. It certainly makes sense that a soldier nearly out of ammo for his main weapon would begin to cast about for either more ammo or a new (and loaded) weapon from the dead and wounded, be they friend or foe. It was actually standard practice to pick up the ammo from a wounded or dead comrade if the time to do so was available and anyone had the carrying capacity.

For all these reasons, I don't think it's really necessary to set aside a large amount of the submachinegunner's regulation ammo load as 'reserve' or 'not available for assault.' If you want to be really conservative, I suppose you could set a half clip or so aside, but that really doesn't change the calculations above that much - you still get an unrealistically high ROF, IMHO.

Keep in mind that anything under 20m range in CM is a toe-to-toe melee. In this kind of fight, especially once they empty the mag currently in the gun, I think soldiers are just as likely to resort to fists, knives, and whatever else as they are likely to attempt to reload - a lot is going to depend on just how close the nearest enemy is. Since ammo is dealt with abstractly in CM, you have to take the average usage - one squad member is a close combat situation might have the separation and positioning to keep firing his weapon, but it's also possible that someone gets embroiled in a grappling match and use virtually no ammo. Also, as noted, grenades tend to curtail small arms usage for everyone, at least briefly - whether you threw it or not, you definitely need to take cover from the blast. This doesn't even begin to take into account another issue, which is that some squad members, no matter what the range, are likely to simply be in a bad position and give no good angle to fire on the enemy.

At slightly longer ranges where there is enough separation to keep things more of a firefight than a melee (20m - 50m or so), I can believe a higher ROF than normal, especially from automatic weapons as the squad goes into a sort of 'mad minute' mode - at this range, you aren't going to do much aiming with a submachinegun, but instead are likely to just 'spray and pray' in the general direction of the enemy. However, an average of 5 1/2 mags of ammo per minute still sounds unrealistically high even for this type of situation.

I really believe that about 3 mags per turn, or about 11 CM 'shots' in the case of a German SMG squad, is a more realistic absolute maximum ROF. I can accept up to 15 'shots' as within the realm of possibility, but 20 or more just seems to be off the charts to me.

Cheers,

YD

[Col Deadmarsh]

I too want more ammo or a slower ROF for infantry in future editions of this game.

I have no facts or anything to back this opinion up nor do I care to do any research on the matter. I simply think infantry burns through ammo too quickly and the unit's combat strength is severely reduced after that--SMG's especially because of their high ROF.

I can't tell you how frustrating it is to have an entire squad burn through their ammo on one other enemy squad. This defeats whatever future plans you had for that unit because thier depleted ammo supply now means they can only fire back in defense.

I've had units run out in just a few turns and I find this ridiculous. BTS, please change this aspect of the game!

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

Keep in mind that anything under 20m range in CM is a toe-to-toe melee. In this kind of fight, especially once they empty the mag currently in the gun, I think soldiers are just as likely to resort to fists, knives, and whatever else as they are likely to attempt to reload - a lot is going to depend on just how close the nearest enemy is.

Well now, I'm not as sure as you are that anything under 20 meters would have that effect. I don't see using fists and knives at anything much over 1 meter. Grenades of course are another matter. My WAG is that 20 meters is about the limit that the average soldier could toss a grenade with useful accuracy.

My point is that general practice was that guys with guns fired them until the enemy got close enough to push the muzzle away. If you emptied your clip, you ducked behind something to change and resumed firing, or you pulled out a pistol if you had one, or a grenade if the enemy wasn't so close that the blast would endanger you or your buddies.

But fists and knives don't come into play until the enemy is within reach (and let's not have someone suggest throwing knives; unless you are one of those talented 1 in 10,000 knife throwers, you are going to miss, and even if you don't miss your knife is gone).

Michael

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

Well now, I'm not as sure as you are that anything under 20 meters would have that effect. I don't see using fists and knives at anything much over 1 meter. Grenades of course are another matter. My WAG is that 20 meters is about the limit that the average soldier could toss a grenade with useful accuracy.

My point is that general practice was that guys with guns fired them until the enemy got close enough to push the muzzle away. If you emptied your clip, you ducked behind something to change and resumed firing, or you pulled out a pistol if you had one, or a grenade if the enemy wasn't so close that the blast would endanger you or your buddies.

But fists and knives don't come into play until the enemy is within reach (and let's not have someone suggest throwing knives; unless you are one of those talented 1 in 10,000 knife throwers, you are going to miss, and even if you don't miss your knife is gone).

Michael

I cited 20m as 'toe to toe' distance because that is the number that is usually thrown around as the actual approximate radius an infantry squad takes up. IOW, the LOS tool may show two infantry squads as 20m apart, but at this distance the abstracted position of the acutal individual soldiers is such that at least some individuals in the opposing squads may be within handshaking distance of each other. Of course, some soldiers may be as much as 40m away from the nearest enemy, but at the very least the more distant opponents are going to have to be more careful about where they are firing because of the potential of hitting one of their own squadmates.

Closer than 20m, and theoretically the two squads' positions are actually overlapping, meaning that all soldiers are going to have to be very careful about where and who they shoot.

I completely agree that most soldiers are going to attempt to continue to use their small arms and/or grenades until very close, and SMG gunners especially since they lack a bayonet will likely abandon the gun for knife or shovel only when forced. Soldiers carrying bolt-action rifle with bayonets might choose to charge an enemy up to, say, 5m away rather than try to reload because they have a better close combat weapon at hand and a more cumbersome close-in firearm. In any event, only the extremely brave or stupid (or both!) are going to try to charge into corps-a-corps with an enemy 20m away rather than try to shoot him.

Cheers,

YD

[MadGav]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

Well now, I'm not as sure as you are that anything under 20 meters would have that effect. I don't see using fists and knives at anything much over 1 meter.

Remember that the unit markers represent the "middle" of the squad, the individuals will be spread around this point. So if we have 2 squads 20m apart that would just require a member of each to be 10m from the centre point to be toe-to-toe.

Martin

[YankeeDog]

To get back to Col. Deadmarsh's comments:

In general, I do not consider infantry squad rates of fire overly high, or ammo loads overly low, so long as the squad in question is carrying mostly bolt-action rifles. The problem seems to lie in what happens when squads start carrying a signifcant portion of automatic weapons.

The closest you can get to an all-bolt action German rifle squad in CMBB is a Pioneer SL squad, with 7 men, 6 with k98s and one with an MP40 or PPSh. While pretty weak in firepower, this squad does come with a generous 61 point ammo load.

The standard load of a typical Soldat carrying an MP40 I have already covered. M Hofbauer's Panzerfaust website lists the standard ammo load for a German Soldier carrying a k98 as either 45 or 90 rounds. I'm going to step out on a limb here and guess that most soldiers in front line infantry squads carried the 90 round load if at all possible. A few of the Pioneer SL squads might be carrying only 45 rounds if they were humping the demo charges or other engineering equipment, but my guess is that most would be carrying the 90 round load, especially if they thought they were likely to see combat in the near future.

At any rate, M Hofbauer also lists the practical ROF for a k98, which has only a 5-round fixed magazine, at about 15 rounds/min. This strikes me as a very reasonable sustained ROF for a bolt-action rifle assuming the soldier is taking some degree of care to aim his shots.

At ranges over 50m, infantry rate-of-fire is a pretty constant 7 shots/min assuming constant engagement of a single target and no supression. This means that it is going to take about eight and a half minutes for the Pioneer squad to run out of ammo under ideal moderate-range firing conditions. Taking the 15 rounds/min figure, one rifleman should be able to fire off about 130 rounds in this time. However, presumably over the course of 8 1/2 minutes, not everyone in the squad is going to be firing at all times - one or two men are likely to be assigned to watch the flanks, someone might be sent to run a message to the platoon commander, the NCO is probably going to take a few seconds to check everyone's position and aim now and then, etc., so CM's eight 1/2 minutes for 90 rounds strikes me as being in the right ballpark.

Things get a bit less clear when you add the squad LMG, though. Move from a Pioneer SL squad to a Rifle 41 squad, and you have only 50 ammo points, and therefore a minute and a half less firing time. Presumably, this reflects the fact that the MG34 this squad carries can burn through ammo fairly quickly. However, the Pioneer SL squad was presumably carrying at least some engineering equipment (not just demo charges, but shovels, blasting cord, various tools, etc.) with it, which may well have taken the place of the MG ammo. IOW, the Rifle 41 squad may simply have been carrying more ammo overall, and therefore deserve an ammo load more similar to the Pioneer SL squad's load.

The big question here is, just how much ammo did the typical German infantry squad carry for it's MG, and was this in addition to the Riflemen's 90 round load for their own weapon, or did some of the riflemen drop back to only 45 rounds in order to carry the MG ammo? Input from German infantry Grogs would be most welcome.

Part of the problem here is that CM does not at present have a variable encumbrance model for infantry squads. Especially the two-MG squads might actually have simply carried more ammunition per soldier to keep the additional MG fed. This would mean that rather than having such widely disparate ammo loads, some squads would be slower to move and quicker to tire due to their heavier pack, rather than quicker to run out of ammo, something which CM currently cannot model. In any event, I find it hard to believe that German Volksgrenadier Heavy SMG squads (6 MP40s & 2 MG42s, and a whopping 15 ammo points standard load) went into battle in Real Life with only 2 minutes worth of ammunition for their weapons. Given that they were the long-range fire element of the platoon, I find it much more likley that they simply went into battle more heavily loaded, and left the fast manuvering to the other squads while they held back and laid down suppressive fire.

I doubt variable encumbrance for squads could be added for CMAK as this would require programming an entirely new feature into the model, but it is something I would really like to see for CMX2, for a variety of reasons.

Cheers,

YD

[Determinant]

Expecting a squad with automatic weapons in a build up area to charge any kind of MG and have something left over for afters seems a mite overambitious. Anyone know how much small arms ammo the 101st burnt through to get Uday and Qusay?

Ammo rate usage in CMBB feels just about right to me.

[Battlefront.com]

The cyclical ROF of the MP40 is actually 500 rounds per minute, not 400. So the theoretical trigger-down time to fire 168 rounds is 20 seconds, not 25. If changing magazines 5 times then takes an additional 25 seconds, we have used up 45 seconds.

That leaves 15 seconds to do everything else (grenades, ducking) including just sitting still. And consider that when a soldier is reloading, that's often when he'll be taking cover. When reloaded, that's when he pops up to fire again.

So we have:

Time Spent / Action

33% Active Firing

42% Ducking and reloading

8% Toss a grenade

17% Do nothing

Considering the example provided was a close-combat situation for totally unsuppressed soldiers who are not taking enemy fire, and yet are trying their hardest to knock out that enemy HMG team before it does get a chance to shoot back at them, this seems reasonable to me.

You'll find that as your units take enemy fire and become suppressed, they fire less frequently.

Charles

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by Determinant:

Expecting a squad with automatic weapons in a build up area to charge any kind of MG and have something left over for afters seems a mite overambitious. Anyone know how much small arms ammo the 101st burnt through to get Uday and Qusay?

Ammo rate usage in CMBB feels just about right to me.

I'm not sure I would call the situation I described, where my SMG squad jumped on an MG unawares from behind "Charging an MG". It's worth noting that had I charged the MG from the front, ammo usage probably would have been significantly less - presumably the MG would have returned fire and there would have been some supression to keep the SMG squad's ammo usage down. Of course it probably would have taken some casualties in the process, and might not have succeeded in taking out the MG.

It is also worth noting that my SMG squad did not seem to become overly fatigued by this insane minute of combat. Even taking no losses (which they didn't), I would think even experienced soldiers would be pretty exhausted by the emotional and physical experience of charging into a building with weapons blazing and grenades flying, and then hunting down the panicked, but still dangerous members on an enemy MG team. They might still have ammo left over after the whole experience, but my guess is that they would need at least several minutes to recover their wits before engaging in further action.

FWIW, I re-ran the same turn several times to make sure the results were not an aberration, and each time the result was about the same - 20+ shots from the SMG squad in a single minute, and the HMG team dead. Actually, once a single member of the HMG team even survived the turn, with my SMG squad expending all 24 shots.

I can believe that it might occasionally take 672 rounds (168 rounds x 4 men) of ammo to finish off 6 members of an HMG team in a room-to-room fight - such combat is very confused and a lot of rounds are probably going to be sprayed around into empty rooms on the chance someone might be hiding there. But I still find it hard to believe that this much ammo could be expended in a single minute by four men. IOW, if my SMG squad had finished off the HMG in two turns, but used the same ammo, I would have no complaints. It is worth noting that had it taken longer to finish off the HMG, it likely would have surrendered, which which would have saved me some ammo - surrendering in CM seems to be partially time-dependent, and units need to spend a certain amount of time at "Routed" before they will actually throw in the towel, no matter how desperate their situation.

In any event, I think my analysis speaks for itself. I remain unconvinced that over 168 rounds from each soldier *plus* and average of one grenade per soldier in a single minute of combat is a realistic possibility no matter what the details of the situation. As noted in my analysis, just standing at a firing line and clearing each mag in turn it would take about 50 seconds to fire of that much ammo. What would change my opinion would be (1) a reasonable analysis or first-person account showing that a soldier actually could expend 168 rounds *and* throw a grenade in one minute of close combat, or (2) reliable info showing that soldiers armed with SMGs in WWII carried significantly less ammo than the figures I have quoted.

It's not a matter of what 'feels' right - I've never been in a gunfight, let alone a piss-your-pants point blank brawl, so I have no idea how it 'feels'. If anyone here who has been in a firefight speaks up and disagrees with me, I will gladly defer to them as the more experienced and knowledgable individual. Otherwise, it's a matter of what makes logical sense looking at the resonable capabilities of the weapon and the soldier carrying it.

Cheers,

YD

Edited to add in response to Charles:

Thank you Charles, for a reasonable analysis and explaination of the current model. I agree that the situation mentioned is a bit unusual because of the lack of return fire. It happens more often that you might at first think, though, as SMG squad ambushes usually result in the opposing infantry going immediately "Pinned" and offering almost no return fire.

I would take a few quibbles with your analysis:

1) Even with your 500 rounds/min ROF, 20 seconds is just trigger down time. Unless each mag in turn were simply fired until empty without so much as a second for aiming or shifting fire, it would actually take somewhat longer. Even at 500rnds/min (400 rounds/min is off of M Hofbauer's usually reliable Panzerfaust site, but I am sure you have good sources for your figure as well), I tend to think my 25 seconds figure is generous, if anything - that's about 1 second per mag to shift aim or whatever. I tend to think 30 seconds 'mag in' firing time is actually closer to reality even with the 500rnds/min figure, but I deliberately underestimated to strengthen my argument.

2) 8% of the turn to throw a grenade works out to 5 seconds to get the grenade out, pull the pin, throw it, and take cover from the blast. The fuse alone on the grenade is going to take 3-5 seconds to burn, and keep in mind that not only the does person throwing the grenade have to take cover to avoid the blast, but presumably everyone else does too - that's 4 grenade throwing incident for each individual, not. True, soldiers could use the time while taking cover from grenade blasts to perhaps reload a mag, but I still think 4 grenade blasts is more likely to eat up at least 10 seconds of time, not 5.

3) 17% to "Do nothing". Well, there's a heck of a lot of 'nothing' to pack into that 10 seconds, even if there is no return fire - moving to gain a better angle of fire, communicating with squadmates so you don't move into someone's line of fire and get shot, figuring out exactly where all 6 of the enemy HMG team members are, checking the movements of YOUR squadmates so you don't accidentally shoot them, etc. I would respectfully submit that 10 seconds is a bit optimistic as far as how much time all these little 1-2 seconds shouts, glances, and movements would actually take.

In any event I do appreciate your response, and am perfectly happy to 'agree to disagree' based on somewhat different, but both reasonable analyses.

Cheers,

YD

[ August 01, 2003, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: YankeeDog ]

[Battlefront.com]

Another thing to keep in mind is that in REAL war soldiers attempt to stay away from close range combat. They are also less likely to shoot and move because both involve risk of being shot. Combat Mission, because it is a game, skews these real world realities and therefore direct comparison with real war can not be made in any exact way.

As for ammo loads... soliders did then, do now, and will into the future carry about enough ammo for one good sized firefight. At least while on the go. From fixed positions the story is different, and it is yet another advantage that goes to the defender. The main reason is weight, the second is bulk. This is why there has been a lot of interest in "caseless" ammo, which cuts down on both. But this is something that has not yet been perfected to the point where armies have adopted such weapons.

Steve

[YankeeDog]

Wow, Steve and Charles piping in on the same thread within minutes of each other. . . now I feel like I've started something .

Steve, your comments about units carrying enough ammo for 'one good firefight' makes me wonder if a variable encumbrance model, and attendant adjustments to mobility and ammo loads, isn't something we'll see for CMX2.

You've certainly got my hopes up!

Cheers,

YD

P.S., I believe Remington had an caseless .22LR cartridge briefly available for the civilian market in the 1970s. I've got a picture of the thing somewhere. . .

[Moon]

YD, I don't want to speak for Charles here, but please note that his answer is based on the premise that indeed 168 rounds are fired in a given time. Personally, despite your thoughtful analysis, I am not sure this is the case. As has been mentioned in this thread previously, CM squads never run out of ammo, which means that you cannot say that a squad uses 92% of its ammo in a given time. If that squad remains in the game for another 30 turns at "low" ammo level, firing a couple of times per turn, than the percentage of ammo used vs. ammo carried is way lower in fact. Therefore, using this as the base for a calculation of individual ammo use has to produce more or less skewed results.

Martin

[leakyD]

My personal experience with ammo loads (infantry squad leader, Gulf War I - No actual combat, but LOTS of practice), is as follows:

Combat loads were ~300 ready rounds in magazines, with a bandolier or two of boxed rounds (can't remember the quantity) that needed to be broken down into magazines.

Our rucksacks usually had more ammo, as well as our IFV's (M2's). We RARELY went into action w. rucksacks on. Everything was on the "track".

BUT, in the time frame of a CM battle (30 minutes) there is little time for reloading/consolidation without taking squads off the line. Usually, one team (4 men) reloads within the squad, while the other team covers. This is done one squad at a time.

At times, the "tracks" were off doing something else, or hiding, so they're weren't always immediately available for overwatch.

The process is repeated until the platoon is back "up". Then platoons can be rotated until the company is "up". Most likely, a company won't have that luxury until the objective is seized (or not) and full consolidation and reorganization is performed. Or, unless this is a protracted action (hours, not minutes)

Further, the only full auto capability is with the SAW (LMG). With this, our ammo consumption was fair, and I found us rarely having to reload from bandoliers until consolidation and reorganization (objective seized, or withdrawal).

I could easily imagine if we all had full auto capability in close combat situations, we would easily blow through ammo as is represneted in game.

In a close combat situation, it's all about getting more rounds out than the objective is replying with. "Hose 'em down" was a popular expression.

I've ran out of ammo too many times in game, and yes it is frustrating!

Hence the need for support units during assaults.

Lots of support units, or be prepared to pull units off the line as they deplete.

I recall all of our "tracks" being available while we swept the objective to deal with "hardpoints" or other bothersome items.

That was the nice thing about the M2 Bradelys. Yeah, the maintenance sux, but having 25mm rapid fire HE and a TOW at your disposal sure helps get the job done.

There *may* be a little tweaking needed with the CM ammo system, but i think it's better to practice your suppression assets (not easy, mind you). Once you get decent at that, I find squad's ammo lasting a little longer.

[YankeeDog]

Sheesh, now all we need is for Madmatt to pipe in and we've got quite a part going. . .

Martin, as to reserving ammo for the 'low ammo' condition - yep, this was brought up before and I dealt with this some in my second post. I would also note that the 168 rounds figure is actually somewhat below the actual ROF I saw in the game - assuming 25 'shots' represents the full 210 round ammo load, 168 rounds is 20 'shots'. What I actually saw was 23 'shots' in 55 seconds.

Cheers,

YD

[Moon]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

Sheesh, now all we need is for Madmatt to pipe in and we've got quite a part going. . .

Martin, as to reserving ammo for the 'low ammo' condition - yep, this was brought up before and I dealt with this some in my second post. I would also note that the 168 rounds figure is actually somewhat below the actual ROF I saw in the game - assuming 25 'shots' represents the full 210 round ammo load, 168 rounds is 20 'shots'. What I actually saw was 23 'shots' in 55 seconds.

Cheers,

YD

OK, I reread your second post. Indeed the "low" ammo level can represent a host of things, including scrounging additional ammo or even picking up a new weapon. Or even swapping of mags between the soldiers in the same or other squads. My point remains that the 92% usage is pretty arbitrary whichever way you look at it. One could easily pick another number just as well.

For example, you are assuming that 25 "shots" represent 210 rounds of ammo. SMG squads can carry more ammo points than 25 however (up to 40?). If all members of a squad carried 7 full mags, maybe a better equivalent would be 35 shots in CM instead of 25?

Martin

[Battlefront.com]

leakyD,

Thanks for the comments!

I could easily imagine if we all had full auto capability in close combat situations, we would easily blow through ammo as is represneted in game.

Er... perhaps this had something to do with the introduction of single/burst only options on your guns? IIRC commanders had a lot of negative things to say about ammo usage in Vietnam. I think we can all remember the footage from the Tet Offensive where guys were putting their M16s over a wall and draining clip after clip without even seeing if they were hitting anything. Full auto takes a lot of skill to use and not abuse. The Germans found this out with their late war MG42 gunners.

As for your other comments... the APC/IFV concept has given the infantry man a heck of a lot more staying power than the foot soldiers of WWII were able to enjoy. Like you described, the Bradley is part IFV, part pack mule. I've even seen a funny picture of a Norwegian APC in Afghanistan that was so loaded with personal gear, food, water, and ammo that the guys had to walk instead of ride! Of course they were largely in "basecamp" mode, so not a problem there.

Thanks in particular for your comments about the difference between having ammo and being able to use it in a pinch. The soldier might only have enough ammo on him for one balls to the walls firefight, but a well supplied and organized unit should have more in reserve. This was true even for WWII. And like then, as now, real combat situations tend to make this much more complicated than it looks on paper ("tracks" are busy, "tracks" are lost, "tracks" are brewed up... all things that screw around with theory badly).

Steve

[leakyD]

Er... perhaps this had something to do with the introduction of single/burst only options on your guns? IIRC commanders had a lot of negative things to say about ammo usage in Vietnam. I think we can all remember the footage from the Tet Offensive where guys were putting their M16s over a wall and draining clip after clip without even seeing if they were hitting anything. Full auto takes a lot of skill to use and not abuse. The Germans found this out with their late war MG42 gunners.

heh..prolly everything!

I remember as a private loving to "rock and roll" on the M16A1. S'fun!

Then, when I became a SL, I welcomed the switch to the A2. Having the rifle maintain fire control (instead of me) made things *much* easier!