Picking up a Thompson with buddy aid

[Aldaros]

Is it intentional that soldiers performing buddy aid never pick up a Thompson? They're always good about grabbing BARs, bazookas, sniper rifles, and rifle grenade launchers, but I've yet to see one pick up a Thompson from a dead squad leader, even when the squad leader had ammo for it, and the medic is just carrying a normal Garand or carbine. Seems like it'd be a favored weapon to take, since it's one of the few automatic weapons in a squad.

[vincere]

I nomrally want the Thompson Guy to pick something up that has ammo left

[RookieCAF]

A Thompson is a very short range weapon. Unless I was in a City or Town I'd probably prefer a Garand.

[Capt Cliff]

Medic's should not be carrying weapons. Violates the Geneva Convention.

[Magpie_Oz]

Medic's should not be carrying weapons. Violates the Geneva Convention.

Not exactly, it is only if they attack with their weapons, they are allowed to defend themselves.

"In modern times, most combat medics carry a personal weapon, to be used to protect themselves and the wounded or sick in their care. When and if they use their arms offensively, or carry arms that qualify as offensive, they then sacrifice their protection under the Geneva Conventions."

[Tarquelne]

Are bona fide medics - as covered by the Conventions - in the game at all? (I haven't seen any yet, and a search of the manual doesn't turn up anything or than buddy aid.)

I thought that just because a soldier lays aside his rifle to give some "buddy aid" he doesn't become a medic as defined by the Conventions. In putting a round through his head the enemy may be being a bastard, but but he's not violating the Convention. Likewise, picking up a Tommy Gun rather than the rifle wouldn't be a violation either.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Yeah, although the UI labels soldiers giving buddy aid as a "medic" I don't think they are the kind that wear Red Crosses. They're just soldiers helping a fallen comrade. Or looting his corpse, as the case may be.

[Tarquelne]

Or looting his corpse, as the case may be.

I've been meaning to say: I'm glad BFC has started putting in the most popular features from other multiplayer games.

[JonS]

Medic's should not be carrying weapons. Violates the Geneva Convention.

Why is it that only Americans seem to have this utterly retarded interpretation of the Conventions?

[Magpie_Oz]

Why is it that only Americans seem to have this utterly retarded interpretation of the Conventions?

Is it because they have a heightened sense of fair play?

Not sure if it is fair comment but it seems on the wargame from the "balance" of a scenario is all important, perhaps more so than others might be concerned about?

[Michael Emrys]

Yeah, although the UI labels soldiers giving buddy aid as a "medic" I don't think they are the kind that wear Red Crosses.

Absolutely. Medics per se are not modeled in the game. Their activities on the battlefield are somewhat accounted for "under then hood" in that wounded men disappear after a while. That could be considered as medics and stretcher bearers removing them to the rear. But that is very abstract.

Michael

[Aldaros]

To clarify, yes, by "medic" I meant random squad members applying bandages/looting corpses, not unarmed guys wearing red crosses (none of whom are in the game anyway).

A Thompson is a very short range weapon. Unless I was in a City or Town I'd probably prefer a Garand.

Since Normandy is full of bocage, with lots of short sight lines and close-range firefights, I'd prefer one Thompson over an eighth or ninth Garand. And even if the game weren't currently focused on combat in bocage country, I'd still want at least one per squad at all times, to provide close-in firepower when needed.

[gunnergoz]

SMG's are really handy when assaulting positions and buildings. I always try to have one or two men on an assault team armed that way if possible.

[Oddball_E8]

the game probarbly just accounts for accuracy over different ranges and ignores the rate of fire hence making even the lowly carbine better than the tommy and the soldier leaves it (unless he is only armed with a pistol and theres nothing else available)

[BloodyBucket]

I don't think the game ignores ROF or the physical effects of a lot of lead in a small area.

I've seen bunched up groups of my guys get torn apart by MGs and SMGs. I think the SMG toting CMBN soldier has an edge in close quarters fighting.

I don't know if the AI will judge the terrain or situation when making weapons swaps with casualties. I'm guessing it just lumps rifles, carbines and SMGs all in the same category when making that choice, so they don't dump one for the other.

[Narsus]

SMG's were largely officers weapons, that is the only connection I can see for them not being picked up.

[Secondbrooks]

SMG's are really handy when assaulting positions and buildings. I always try to have one or two men on an assault team armed that way if possible.

In CMSF all that counted in CQB was pretty much size of magazine/belt weapon used and which bullet it shot. Basically that meant that M240/PKM was better CQB weapon than M4/AK as it kept on rocking for longer time and put it's target down better, there wasn't difference in weapon handling speed or anything between LMG and carbine. Steve gave me answer more or less like this this when i asked him about weapons and their differences in CQB.

If this stays true also in CMBN then SMGs aren't as good as they historically were. Large capacity magazine still gives them edge, but that would be about it... Well for Germans SMG still probably is great CQB-tool as they lack semi-automatic rifles. But i still haven't bought the game, so i'm guessing mostly.

Ps. Are there kneeling/standing deep trences in CMBN where SMG would historically really be at it's own play ground? Were there such in Normandy? I'd guess that answer to both questions would be: Not.

[womble]

I've seen bunched up groups of my guys get torn apart by MGs and SMGs. I think the SMG toting CMBN soldier has an edge in close quarters fighting.

Darntootin'. In Busting the Bocage, I was still playing on 'Basic Training', and I could see that the Shreck team that tore two squads to bits had 2 MP40s as its secondary weapons. Add the quite unfeasible effective ranges of SMGs and you'll soon see that their RoF is a serious advantage. On another occasion I've seen 3 guys apparently topple from just the one burst, and a single MP40 at about 70m range dropped another half dozen guys advancing through scrub under trees in the same minute.

[sburke]

Is it intentional that soldiers performing buddy aid never pick up a Thompson? They're always good about grabbing BARs, bazookas, sniper rifles, and rifle grenade launchers, but I've yet to see one pick up a Thompson from a dead squad leader, even when the squad leader had ammo for it, and the medic is just carrying a normal Garand or carbine. Seems like it'd be a favored weapon to take, since it's one of the few automatic weapons in a squad.

You can have my Thompson IF you can pry it from my cold dead, rigor mortis affected fingers - Charlton Heston

[Magpie_Oz]

You can have my Thompson IF you can pry it from my cold dead, rigor mortis affected fingers - Charlton Heston

Actually the phrase is originally attributed to Bob Loopie, which is the most ironically appropriate name.

[SlapHappy]

I think they should drop the effective range of the SMG's (which, apparently they are) and increase their typical ROF at very close ranges. Would be nice if the SMG user had the ability to do a little "spraying" nothing outrageous, just a bit of extra wow. Somehow, I don't think this is modelled in the game, though, shots always seem to be fired at pinpoint locations/individuals.

[gunnergoz]

SMG's were largely officers weapons, that is the only connection I can see for them not being picked up.

Actually, most officers were issued M1 Carbines and it seems to me it was the squad leaders and platoon sergeants who tended to collect all the Thompsons and grease guns...trust the NCO's to scrounge big time.

Here's what the TOE's said at the time per an Osprey book on the GI in WW2:

[SlapHappy]

Yup. Just like in Combat!

That's one thing the show got pretty much right.

[gunnergoz]

What always irked me about Combat was that this infantry squad fought the war by itself and was never part of any platoon or company, that I could see.

[Magpie_Oz]

I think they should drop the effective range of the SMG's (which, apparently they are) and increase their typical ROF at very close ranges. Would be nice if the SMG user had the ability to do a little "spraying" nothing outrageous, just a bit of extra wow. Somehow, I don't think this is modelled in the game, though, shots always seem to be fired at pinpoint locations/individuals.

Dunno if that was the best use of an SMG, they were more about lots of rounds at a close target rather than area suppression like an LMG