Hallo! w/discussion

[Fußball]

Hallo alle! First time poster, long time reader. Happy to finally have registered here. I have a problem that has been annoying me ever since I looked at the small arms values of each country. The problem being, the values on the SMGs are slightly off. And by no means in this discussion am I flaming this great game series. Some SMGs have less firepower or more than they should. Maybe the designers have some, unbeknownst to myself, point in making the values the way they did but I myself wish they could be changed. Its not a big problem but its rather annoying in such a greatly realistic game. Now onto the facts and problems.

In CM the Mp40 is a horrid SMG by comparison to the Sten mk.II and M3A1 "greasegun". Personally the point value, in my opinion and from what I have read, of the Thompson, PPD, and Ppsh were in the right place. The Greasegun should by no means have more firepower than the Mp40. The reasons being....

MaschinenPistole40

Calibre. 9mm

Magazine Capacity. 32rounds ( 1 or 2 being left out by some soldiers due to weak magazine spring often jamming )

Rate of Fire. 500rpm

Muzzle Velocity. 370mps

M3A1 Greasegun

calibre. .45ACP

Magazine Capacity. 30rounds

Rate of Fire. 400rpm

Muzzle Velocity. 280mps

Personal accounts from soldiers and several collectors comment on the Mp40's excellent accuracy for a SMG due to its average rate of fire. An account by G.I.s actually stated that they dropped their Thompsons for captured Mp40s due to the easier recoil control and better accuracy!

The Comparison being that while the M3 has a larger more stronger round the Mp40 has both rate of fire and muzzle velocity advantage. Thus showing the Mp40 could provide more firepower and at slightly longer ranges due to the speed of the round and could lay down more firepower. The one thing the two do have in great common is their controllable rate of fire even when using full auto. Now maybe the reason the value is what it is because of the calibre, but that would still not be enough for the M3 to be overall better. The current value being: Mp40 = 36 - M3A1 = 38 I think the values should be switched or at least have the firepower at Mp40 = 38or39 - M3A1 = 36. In comparison with the Sten mk.II the Sten's firepower should stay the same, I am geussing the only reason it has extra firepower is because the extra 50rounds rate of fire. Other than that, exlcuding reliability between the two, the Mp40 and Sten are somewhat very comparable.

Now onto the Beretta Modello 1938. From what I have read and information from soldiers who carried or from soldiers who captured it, the Beretta 1938 was an exceptional SMG. It was prized by both Germans, Italians and their Allied captors. Now the only drawback for making its point values so low is that the Beretta while having a variety of ammo capacities had a ten round ammo capacity in one clip variation. Perhaps this is the reasoning for making its point value so low. But from what I have seen in the default photo it seems to have a 20 or 30 round magazine. Heres the stats...

Berreta Modello 1938A

Calibre. 9mm

Magazine Capacity. 10,20,30,or 40rounds

Rate of Fire. 600rpm

Muzzle Velocity. 430mps

And from personal accounts of those who have shot the Berreta 1938 its said that the SMG has a decent accuracy within 100m. While the kick is controllable enough when shot in bursts.

I would have at least given the Berreta 1938 a 36 point value.

There are a few others weapons I would like to rant on about but other than these the values are very realistic and down to a good amount. Maybe the values are only seperated by 1 or 2 points but remember this reflects the historic accuracy and realism put into each weapon! One more curiousity I would like to discuss... Why was a G43(K43) not added to the German arsenal? Just over 400,000 were produced, enough in my opinion to randomly add one, maybe but very rarely two, in a squad replacing what would have been a soldier with a k98. I mean its the same thing as replacing the Thompson with the Greasegun randomly in 1942 and up.

I would love to discuss more but I'm afraid if I added more no one would want to read it!!! I am open to any comments or constructive criticism!

Tschüß!

Erich

[JasonC]

The main differences in SMG firepowers are justified by ROF and mag size issues. The MP 40 and grease are in game terms barely distinguishable, as 2 fp at 40m means essentially nothing - and the grease is rarely present in any numbers. Part of the higher value for the Thompson reflects the greater stopping power of the .45 round. A bit of that presumably applies with the grease, as well. As for the Italian, it is purely mag capacity. 20 round mags are insufficient for an MP firing at point blank range. As for the German semi auto rifle, it was produced in such limited numbers and issued as a specialty weapon (e.g. in sniper configurations), that it would be quite inaccurate to have 1 per squad. The difference from a K98 would only be a few points at the closest, 40m and 100m range windows anyway. There is a vastly larger effect to a squad having a single MP44 in place of a K98, than all of these changes combined.

Arguably, the largest inaccuracy in small arms in CMAK is the nearly pure rifle loadout of all the US squads. This does reflect TOE but it doesn't reflect known historical reality. The US fielded many times more SMGs than the Germans did, but you'd never know it playing CM. And more M-1 carbines were issued than M-1 rifles - something again you'd never guess from CM. It is true both were more heavily used by service troops, weapons crews, drivers, HQ types etc, than the line infantry. But a typical 1944 squad would have several SMGs and carbines, giving significantly higher close range firepower (from much larger mags).

Then there is the misunderstanding about M1919 A6s being represented as M1919 A4s. The real US airborne squad carried 2 belt fed bipod LMGs. In CM, you get medium speed 3 man MMG teams instead. This is about like taking German panzergrenadiers and representing them by 1 SMG rest rifle "squads", and LMG counters. It neuters US airborne, making them both underpowered and tactically clumsy, completely unrealistically.

To worry about whether 2 points of range 40m FP should shade this way or that, compared to such errors, would appear to be a matter of national bias.

[Aco4bn187inf]

Willkommen, Fussball,

Pardon my spelling.

Jason C., I am glad to see you mention the US bipod-mounted LMG. I was wondering why it doesn't appear in the game. Even if it weren't included in the paratrooper squads, it seems it would have been a more important team to represent than, say, the 2-man BAR team.

But at this point it's all water under the bridge.

[Fußball]

Originally posted by JasonC:

As for the German semi auto rifle, it was produced in such limited numbers and issued as a specialty weapon (e.g. in sniper configurations), that it would be quite inaccurate to have 1 per squad. The difference from a K98 would only be a few points at the closest, 40m and 100m range windows anyway. There is a vastly larger effect to a squad having a single MP44 in place of a K98, than all of these changes combined.

Arguably, the largest inaccuracy in small arms in CMAK is the nearly pure rifle loadout of all the US squads. This does reflect TOE but it doesn't reflect known historical reality. The US fielded many times more SMGs than the Germans did, but you'd never know it playing CM.

To worry about whether 2 points of range 40m FP should shade this way or that, compared to such errors, would appear to be a matter of national bias.

Danke Aco. To Jason: I think you may have misunderstood me on the G43. I did not mean every squad should have one. But that it should be a random replacement for a k98 in a squad every so often. Such as in CMBB squads can often start out with a Ppsh instead of an Mp40. 400,000 was enough to at least add it in as an uncommon occurance in the later 1943 and 44 squads. And while on the bolt action rifles, most bolt actions would have a slightly larger FP value, still just one or two, over a semi-automatic rifle at extended ranges. Since of course in the semi-automatic mechanism an amount of gas was used to slide the bolt back automaticaly.

Onto the SMGs... As I previously said and still with your points stated the Mp40's FPs are underrated for the SMG. Since in comparison at closer range the Mp40 would hold the better match w/500rpms to the M3's mere 400. I personally think the Mp40 should be better represented than it is. And about the Thompson, as I previously stated I think its value is very correct. Since it not only has 700rpm but has .45 calibre for knockdown. I also think that further American sqauds should receive more M3s from late 1942 and up than the rare few there are. The same thing with the PPD in CMBB. Its not like after 1941 the PPD was phased out of service. And with most other Russian small arms it was in PLENTIFUL supply! A dissapointment is how cloned the SMGs and rifles are at ranges further than 40m. I understand that past 40m there is not going to be much difference in FP for the SMGs. But with rifles its cloned for many.

Depending on what you are speaking of. The U.S. produced by far many times more firearms than Germany. But in squadrons most men were armed with the M1 Garand. Officers, crewmen, etc. were more likely to have the M1 Carbine or Thompson. And of course the usual higher ranking NCO may have a SMG or carbine. I also think that instead of the BAR certain squadrons should have the A4 or A6 LMG. And was the BAR not used as more of a support weapon? And obviosly can fill the MG role if need be. Of course I am no expert on the U.S. armed forces so correct me if I am wrong. And many soldiers reported to, since in the U.S. Army there was no rule specifying the soldier must use his service rifle, would grab a Thompson had the previous man carrying it gone down, died, or so on.

Of course being German and liking the Mp40 could be a bias; but I am only stating fact. It would make the game even better to have such small differences in FP for weapons showing that even down to small arms CM rises above the rest! Which of course CM is the best in strategy.

Tschüß!

Erich

[JasonC]

"bolt actions would have a slightly larger FP value, still just one or two, over a semi-automatic rifle at extended ranges. Since of course in the semi-automatic mechanism an amount of gas was used to slide the bolt back"

This is what in philosophy is known as a non sequiter. A howling one in this case. "Since"? I grant the since clause, and the conclusion does not follow. It does not begin to follow. It does not begin to hint of possibly following.

The MV of a M-1 round is quite sufficient to hit with match accuracy at 1000 yards and put down large game. Some sniper shooters at extreme range - well over 500m - marginally prefer bolt actions, not because of velocity but because barrel travel is minimized. For ordinary infantry fire there is no appreciable difference between a round from a K98 and a round from an M-1 Garand or a Lee Enfeld. Only how many rounds go downrange per unit time might change the FP ratings and with aiming time dominating at longer ranges, there is nothing to choose between them.

Incidentally, the Germans preferred semi-autos for sniping because of faster re-acquisition of the target for a second shot. 50k of the 400k G43s were issued in sniper configurations (scoped etc).

Then at one point you say some squads should have A4 LMGs in place of BARs. There is no such animal. The machinegun, 30 caliber, Browning, model 1919, A4 - is a tripod mounted medium machinegun. The machinegun, 30 caliber, Browning, model 1919, A6 is a bipod mounted light machinegun. The A6 was the standard squad automatic weapon in the US airborne, used instead of the BAR, and issued 2 per squad - a very large amount of firepower.

CM does not appear to know the A6 even existed. It has A4s with 3 man teams instead, with the ammo lower to reflect a smaller team, but speed no faster and not incorporated into the squad. There is no reason for an MG-42 to be an organic squad weapon and the 1919A6 not to be. It is just a mistake.

The A6 was not issued outside of the airborne. But it was fielded in sufficient numbers to actually be used in the airborne, in place of BARs.

Still on the subject of BARs, you say at one point, weren't they used more as support weapons. No they were not. They were the standard squad automatic weapon in all other US infantry types. They were also accumulated well beyond TOE because they were well liked. By late war typical squads carried 2 and some carried 3. In CMAK, the armored infantry are not given any, when we know from AARs they often had 2 per squad.

On grease guns, they were most commonly issued to vehicle crews and the like. By far more common was the M-1 carbine, as in 7 million issued. The army encouraged using the M-1 Garand (not carbine) in part to simplify ammo supply and interchangeable ammo use with the BAR - both used standard 30-06 ammo, while the carbine used a lighter round and of course the Thompson used 45 ACP.

The brass also still had somewhat romantic notions about long range marksmen shooting by every line rifleman, and underrated the importance of close range, surge firepower in infantry combat. The men did not and armed themselves as they pleased.

Another side of this is that scoped rifles were much more common than we typically see in CM. In every armored infantry squad, for instance, it was standard for one man to have a scoped rifle. Early on a Springfield bolt action, later on typically a standard M-1 Garand. The Springfield was retained in part as a better platform for the early rifle grenades. In 1944 a better adapter for semi-auto firing a rifle grenade was fielded and that reason for keeping a few Springfields around disappeared.

[Fußball]

Originally posted by JasonC:

Incidentally, the Germans preferred semi-autos for sniping because of faster re-acquisition of the target for a second shot. 50k of the 400k G43s were issued in sniper configurations (scoped etc).

Another side of this is that scoped rifles were much more common than we typically see in CM. In every armored infantry squad, for instance, it was standard for one man to have a scoped rifle. Early on a Springfield bolt action, later on typically a standard M-1 Garand. The Springfield was retained in part as a better platform for the early rifle grenades. In 1944 a better adapter for semi-auto firing a rifle grenade was fielded and that reason for keeping a few Springfields around disappeared.

Thanks for correction on the U.S. forces. My knowledge on the U.S. army is pretty bare.

Actually this is untrue. Most German scharfschützen prefered the bolt action rifle greatly. Especialy the more experienced. The top three scharfschützen commented on prefering the scoped k98 due to the higher range and accuracy. While being a wonderful sniper rifle the G43 was not most prefered.

Now I may not know much on U.S. armored forces but I do know that the U.S. army did not have 1 sniper per squad as you suggested. The snipers were about 1 per company. Or roughly 1 per every 100 men. American doctrine did not look at the sniper during WWII in the way that other countries did. Despite being some of the first employers of what became the modren sniper in the Revolutionary War. America looked more upon the sniper in WWII as more of disdain. And no the Garand was never used much as a sniper rifle as some people really think. From what I have read the Springfield was prefered due to, yet again, the further accuracy and range of the Springfield. Not many Garands were outfitted with a scope during WWII since the Springfield was still the better sniper rifle.

Now in CM obviously the sniper is not as effective as in real life. But this is in part to the fact that if it were the sniper could be used very unrealisticaly.

Tschüß!

Erich

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Fußball:

Now I may not know much on U.S. armored forces but I do know that the U.S. army did not have 1 sniper per squad as you suggested. The snipers were about 1 per company. Or roughly 1 per every 100 men.

I'm not sure where Jason got his figures from. The one per squad is new to me. But I've learned to be circumspect about disagreeing with him on matters of hard fact.

I do know that for leg infantry the official TO&E prescribes one sharpshooter (not really a full-fledged sniper) per platoon, but in practice this role was often discarded and the sharpshooter reverted to being just another infantryman, usually with a Garand. So your ratio of one per 100 is probably in the ballpark as a practical matter.

Michael

[JasonC]

One scoped Springfield in each squad was standard in the 3rd Army from the time of the Nancy fighting onward. They were found useful, that is all the explanation needed. They also ditched their 57mm ATGs to form an extra rifle platoon, because an AD had enough medium AT weapons on its tanks but not nearly enough infantrymen to go around. They had a bazooka in every 'track. They carried BARs even though they weren't TOE. Etc. Read the unit histories of 4th armored and 6th armored.

On semi-autos and German snipers, of course there were a lot more K98s than G43s, all around. (By like a factor of 40). But they issued a disportionate number of the G43s in sniper configurations. Still only about 1 of them in 8, but that is a much higher ratio than the portion of K98s so issued. No doubt individual snipers choose their weapon, but the army ordnance types seemed to think the specialized G43s were more valuable as scoped weapons.