machine guns

[Vesku]

You have that right and with the slow moving infantry the whole game is just crawling forward.

[klanx171]

Ahh for the good ol days, I recently played 1946 battle using Maus Tanks and King tigers against another player using the same, germans win WW2 then civil war idea, anway the tanks were slow, the AT guns did massive damage and the infantry in close quarters kicked ass, that siad the late war panthers were fearsome tanks when used well, usually by my op not me.

[RedDevil]

I have found WW2 to be a tad bit slower than MBT and like MBT far better just for the fact that everything seems to kill something, where in WW2, it's just a suppression and a rally fest every turn. Now the WW2 game does have some bright moments, but I like tank combat a wee bit more than Infantry hand bag fights in the woods.. :)

I think Stone fire hit the nail as dismounting is a bad thing when in the LOS of something that can shoot. Pop smoke with the little mortars to cover the dismount even..
One of the few things I'd like to have in the game is the ability to decide WHO gets off the transport 1st in the case of multiple units.. this way a sniper can hopefully get off, survive, pinpoint the fire direction and give some smoke cover to the others on board.

[Narwan]

Another thing to keep in mind is that these machinegun units int he game are crewserved units. What that means is that several men have to be huddled close together to use the weapon system effectively. That means the men in a mg unit will be grouped together in one or more bunches in the hex they are in. A regular infantry unit of the same size and same number of men can have them spread out all across the hex. What this means in the game is that when crewserved weapons take a hit, they tend to get more casualties than non crewserved units. So it's best to keep them out of small arms range of the opponents units.

One very effective use I have for mg units is to use them to hose down the area through which I'll have AFV's moving and where there may be enemy infantry units. Thanks to the splash effect those infantry untis tend go get pinned (but be careful, units with good experience may take quite a bit of 'hosing' before they become pinned!). Any infantry unit whose status is 'ready' has a (theoretical) change of destroying an AFV by close assaulting; most of us have probably witnessed the single sniper who's out of grenades destroying a tank by close assaulting at one point in our gaming careers. By getting these unit pinned you prevent them from close assaulting, and thereby destroying your AFV's that way. If they have infantry AT weapons they can still hurt you, but if they don't or the ones they have aren't good enough to get through the armor you may well have saved yourself a couple of AFV's by spraying some mg area fire.

[klanx171]

One of the things I have enjoyed the most about WW2:) is that MGs do have a splash effect and that there is a chance now that thin skinned vehicle like APCs can be destroyed by hits which seems realistic, also being able to button a mass of tanks from all those rounds bouncing around from the splash has really worked as well. MGs now also chew up infantry which is as it should be.

The flip side of this is that I have noticed that AT guns are much more susceptible to fire, rout quickly but are more deadly so they work well at range but suffer:kill: at anything else unless keyholed

[AlienXXX]

Guys,

Thanks to all for sharing your views and experience, in particular to Narwan for explaining why the kill routines work the way they do:

Another thing to keep in mind is that these machinegun units int he game are crewserved units. What that means is that several men have to be huddled close together to use the weapon system effectively. That means the men in a mg unit will be grouped together in one or more bunches in the hex they are in. A regular infantry unit of the same size and same number of men can have them spread out all across the hex. What this means in the game is that when crewserved weapons take a hit, they tend to get more casualties than non crewserved units.

So I was right that my MGs really were taking more damage from small arms fire than normal infantry units. And there is a good reason why.
I guess the same explains what klanx171 pointed out about AT guns.

The flip side of this is that I have noticed that AT guns are much more susceptible to fire, rout quickly but are more deadly so they work well at range but suffer:kill: at anything else unless keyholed