Tank MG ammo points

[Omi]

Why do certain armored vehicles carry so few ammunition for their MGs? As an example, a jagpanther or stugIII has only 24 ammo points while a panther will have 204. Does MG ammunition take that much space in a tank? Why is there such a big difference between certain types of tank?

[JasonC]

The physical number of rounds carried varied widely. And the higher rate of fire MGs have ammo points that represent a larger number of rounds, to reflect a similar firing time (with a higher fp to match). E.g. a round of MG-42 represents around 40 physical bullets. With lower ROF MGs, it is more than 25 bullets per CM ammo point.

Why did some AFVs actually carry 600 rounds, and others carry 3000? Because they expected to use their MGs less. A Jagdpanther or other dedicated TD has only a hull MG meant for close defense against enemy infantry, for example. It is expected to fire with its cannon and at long range, typically from deep inside one's own positions, to fully exploit the gun's range. The MG is distinctly secondary and only for close defense.

But a Pz IV has a turret-mounted coaxial MG as well as a hull MG. It is a regular tank, expected to attack into and through enemy positions. It is fully expected to fight enemy infantry, and to defeat it. The coaxial is fired at infantry, reserving HE for guns, buildings, bunkers, and the like. So it carries 3000 rounds, not 600. The coaxial is meant to be able to hose down enemy infantry positions for long periods of time, to "recon by fire", etc.

In the case of some allied AFVs, the number of shots is lower for higher caliber MGs, because the rounds themselves are much larger. Thus a Sherman may have 12 shots from its 50 cal, representing 300 bullets in a tray mount for this "AA" MG. But 160 shots from its coaxial and hull 30 cals, representing 4000 rounds of much smaller ammo.

Against infantry, either will serve. Against airplanes or light vehicles, obviously the bigger 50 cal bullets are individually much more effective. It is worth carrying fewer to have more punch against those targets, but more important to just have lots against ordinary infantry. Thus a division of labor: a small number of 50 cal rounds, lots of 30 cal rounds.

I hope this helps.

[wygal]

Hey JasonC,

Just a second thought on this, specifically the use of the 50cal. We've all been there, initial use of your Sherm for suppression fire or recon by fire. All you need is the regular mg(s). But damn, the 50cal load is always expended. You'd like it for softer AFVs or more hardened targets, but it always flows away. I can't believe these rounds would thrown away so.

[Omi]

I wish we could choose which weapon we use when we give a target command. The game asks you if you want to use the main gun when you do an area target, but the MG is always used. This is annoying when you waste all your MG rounds in order to take down a building with the main gun.

[JasonC]

To avoid using 50 cal ammo, you can button. Just a workaround, but available now.

[Redwolf]

Omi, real tanks always have plenty MG ammo (and usually 2 MGs), it is the specialized vehicles which have only basic self-defense capability against infantry that have less.

Another way to think about is is whether the AVF designer bothered to make the MG easily accessible for reload. Thousands of rounds don't fit one belt or one box.

The AFVs with few MG ammo usually mount the MG to have one box of MG ammo fixed up with the MG and are not expected to have it changed during a fight.

[Big Jim]

Must admit, the use of .50 cal rounds is pretty annoying when they're much more useful than regular 7.62mm in certain roles. Didn't think of buttoning (doh!), but then again, if an enemy aircraft turns up its not much use then.

Actually, what am I whinging about- I haven't seen any axis aircraft from sicily ono.