The Commander Series Forum

Forum Home Forum Home
ImageCurrent Forum Category Blitzkrieg Commander, 1936-45
ImageImageCurrent Forum BKC-II Rule Queries
ImageImageImageCurrent Topic HMG's in a 1 stand = Section level game
Post Reply
Post Reply
Author Page 1 
nick2729
United Kingdom
Joined 22/03/06
Last Visit 07/05/12
53 Posts
Posted on 05 May 2011 at 11:28:03 GMT
HMG's seem very under powered if playing at 1 stand = 1 section. Do any of you alter the stats for these?

Even at 1 stand = 1 platoon the rate of fire seems a little low even with the extended range.
Dr Dave
Wales
Joined 08/10/07
Last Visit 04/11/19
936 Posts
Posted on 05 May 2011 at 15:51:13 GMT
This occasioanlly rears it's head. I'm not convinced that they're at all underpowered.

At the SECTION level:
A rifle section contains 1 LMG (possibly 2) with a similar rof to the HMG as well as all those rifles. Where the HMG wins out is in being tripod mounted. Hence, in this sustained fire role, it gets a longer range.

Simple rof's seem to suggest:
Bren 500 rpm
9 Enfields adding another 100 rpm MAX

So this section might fire up to 600 rpm MAX

An MG34 has a rof of 700 rpm average?

This takes no account of barrel changes, ammo supply, reloading etc... so is VERY simplistic but might point to there being not much difference?

We do live in a culture of the machine gun as king due to WW1, but those had even slower rof's. They hit so many men not because of their rof, but because of the way they were sited - often with overlapping fields of fire and they tended to fire along the wire / no mans land. NOT straight into it.
nick2729
United Kingdom
Joined 22/03/06
Last Visit 05/01/17
53 Posts
Posted on 05 May 2011 at 16:32:36 GMT
My understanding is that the MG34 had a rof of 8-900rpm. That would put a single mg34 at least 2-30% more than a section. Don't forget the stat is listed as being for both MG34 and MG42 - the MG42 1200 rpm. The Bren also had to change magazines and change barrels so its rate of fire would probably be effected more than the belt fed mg for these factors.

WW1 hadn't entered my mind - what had was the countless accounts from Normandy (and other fronts) where troops were pinned down or cut to pieces by MG's positioned to their front. And that was with the troops often benefiting from the "cover" given by a corn/wheat field (being hit on a 5-6 in BKC terms).
Dr Dave
Wales
Joined 08/10/07
Last Visit 04/11/19
936 Posts
Posted on 05 May 2011 at 20:00:23 GMT
Yeah. noted on the rofs of the MG34 - it was tuned down IIRC, but you're right. BUT, you also have to change barrels on the MG34/42 - probably more often than on a Bren due to the high rof?

Also, rofs can be misleading - I often think the weapon with the highest rof is the one that'll run out of ammo the quickest! At the end of the day rof is more often a theoretical max. Take the Bren: 30 round mag. Normally they's fire bursts of 2-10 shots. But even then it's time to change mags in perhaps 30 seconds?

Personally I think it's a hard one to call Confused
Panzerleader71
Canada
Joined 26/01/08
Last Visit 18/02/15
765 Posts
Posted on 05 May 2011 at 20:09:38 GMT
I think this is one of those subjective points in the game. I play at the 1 stand=1 platoon level, but I consider an MG stand to be a section. So, the fire power listed seems alright to me.
ianrs54
England
Joined 08/11/08
Last Visit 19/01/23
1348 Posts
Posted on 06 May 2011 at 08:06:58 GMT
The high rate of fire with the MG-34/42 is a RED HERRING. The weapons are not the best in the LMG role, nor for sustained fire. The dont have an easy change barrel, you need to use a glove, were the hell is it. It's also been established, for NWE anyway, that 1 burst hit 1 man, and 1 Full Calibre Rifle round would put a man down. Double tapping a Bren (which is dead easy), was much more economical than the multi shots form it's German equivalent.

The rates being quoted are cyclic, the weapon can do that in contious fire, but they arn't used that way, you need to find the pratical rate, for a Bren about 100-120 rounds min, and an MG34-42 may be 200.

Difference between WWI and WWII is one of formation, in WWI the troops operated in an extended line, and the Vickers/MG-08 were sited to enfilade these, WWII this was more dispered, so less effective MG fire.

IanS
nick2729
United Kingdom
Joined 22/03/06
Last Visit 05/01/17
53 Posts
Posted on 06 May 2011 at 09:46:31 GMT
You seem to be missing the point that whilst both weapons may only kill one man the additional number of rounds striking in the area then suppressed the rest of the section.

Even on your figures (and adding in fire from the rest of the section) the MG34 will still put down around 30% more rounds into an area. Do you really believe this had no additional effect on the troops facing it?
Dr Dave
Wales
Joined 08/10/07
Last Visit 04/11/19
936 Posts
Posted on 10 May 2011 at 09:34:39 GMT
"the additional number of rounds striking in the area then suppressed the rest of the section"

But that's already catered for in the suppression rule? We use troop quality as per BKC1 regardless of cover. Elite suppressed on a 6, normal on a 5+, poor on a 4+.
Page 1