mike_the_wino Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 If you haven't seen Saving Private Ryan, read no further. SPOILERS! Okay. So when the guys come across that mg42 why do they rush it rather than stand off and let the sharpshooter do his work? It just seems pointless, stupid and poor tactical decision for such well trained troops. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeatEtr Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Because it's Hollywood lameness, more drama the better at the expense of reality. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dietrich Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Yeah, Rangers wouldn't be so tactically inept. A counter-question: In the end battle scene, why do none of the MG34s and MG42s visible on screen ever fire? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Because it's Hollywood lameness, more drama the better at the expense of reality. Not all of the audience are grogs and tactical wizards like "us'n." Most people assume war is about rushing m.g. positions, pulling grenade pins with your teeth and lobbing them at an enemy 10 feet in front of you. If the film had been absolutely realistic, it might have pleased us but been too boring or incomprehensible to the general public that had to make the film justify its production costs...so give 'em pretty much what they expect, like glorious charges and bitter deaths in battle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Well if they did it'd make the sniper the magic bullet. Have a tactical scenario? Get a sniper. Why bother with line troops. We - the people on this board - are supposed to know it's not like that. A sniper at MG range will fire against dug in troops and get suppressed before he has a chance at a second shot. The MG will be ranged and all cover will be on the card. What it should have done was shown how an MG, alone, can suppress but not kill. And how a rifle troop can split and have parts pinned while parts are advancing. How if done by well trained troops against an enemy without a manoeuvre option it can eventually - and possibly with losses - take a position. But all that wasn't in the SPR remit; it's only grogs that'd be arsed. Twenty minutes of careful crawling round isn't very filmable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Well, they could've done a realistic tactical scenario that an audience might understand, but that would cut in to the time alloted to moralistic tearjerker speeches and patriotic dickmeasuring. Wouldn't want that, would we? Priorities, man! Priorities!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Or you sit back and let the company mortars/arty take care of the MG nest, which was anyway sited pretty much in the open. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Look on the bright side. Reportedly, the realization that SPR was pretty much crap spurred Spielberg and Hanks into making BoB, which wasn't complete crap. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 Look on the bright side. Reportedly, the realization that SPR was pretty much crap spurred Spielberg and Hanks into making BoB, which wasn't complete crap. Michael Good point, Michael. I sure enjoy watching BOB repeats much more than I do SPR. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FAI Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 Okay. So when the guys come across that mg42 why do they rush it rather than stand off and let the sharpshooter do his work? It just seems pointless, stupid and poor tactical decision for such well trained troops. Somebody needed to die according to the plot, and an MG42 was a cool way to die on a war movie. You should ask why on earth the lone MG42 was there at the first place? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavicula_Nox Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 Somebody needed to die according to the plot, and an MG42 was a cool way to die on a war movie. You should ask why on earth the lone MG42 was there at the first place? LP/OP; or a patrol that decided to dig in rather than rejoin it's parent unit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FAI Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 LP/OP; or a patrol that decided to dig in rather than rejoin it's parent unit. So, if it was just a separated but stationary unit, why didn't they just bypass it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavicula_Nox Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 So, if it was just a separated but stationary unit, why didn't they just bypass it? You're asking me? Alright. Their patrol leader has been showing PTSD symptoms the entire movie. Sometimes guys get, what I call, their "wyrd" and they get ultra-fatalistic and obsessive about certain things. When they're sitting around arguing about the whole thing, he remarks that their objective "is to win the war" which, certainly isn't going to be accomplished by wiping out a single MG nest over-watching a dead Radar station. There was also the matter of the dead paratroopers, obviously killed by the machine gunners. Likely, a great deal of complex emotions working together to pile a good deal of stress onto an already troubled commander. Or, it could just be what the other guy said. Someone had to die in the storyline, and charging a machine gun right down it's primary axis of fire seemed like a good enough way of doing it. Tactically speaking, it wasn't very intelligent, as was pointed out, the machine gun team could have been suppressed indefinitely, and the gun itself could have been rendered inoperable by the sniper. *edit* I just realized you were "the other guy" who said someone had to die in the storyline. I think this is the most likely explanation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 Somebody needed to die according to the plot, and an MG42 was a cool way to die on a war movie. You should ask why on earth the lone MG42 was there at the first place? Or why they placed the MG42 in the middle of an open area behind an upright wall of sandbags instead of digging it in or positioning themselves within the substantial concrete structure of the radar station. Maybe they'd been playing too much Close Combat Normandy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavicula_Nox Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 Or why they placed the MG42 in the middle of an open area behind an upright wall of sandbags instead of digging it in or positioning themselves within the substantial concrete structure of the radar station. Maybe they'd been playing too much Close Combat Normandy. Wehrmacht Standing Order No. 571: All personnel shall remain outside at all times and cease all camouflaging operations without exception. A force posture with the maximum degree of visibility and vulnerability is to be maintained at all times. It is time to show the Amis that we are not afraid! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigduke6 Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 Twenty minutes of careful crawling round isn't very filmable. Getting close to sig material there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.