MG-42 Range discrepancy

Guggy
General
Posts: 8645
Joined: Thu 17 Nov 2011 02:53
Location: peaceful skeleton realm
Contact:

MG-42 Range discrepancy

Postby Guggy » Fri 19 Jul 2019 18:53

1500 meter MMG in a world of 1000 to 1200 meter MMGs is kind of excessive, especially when you consider the point-fire role.

If this was meant to model efficiency at range with beaten-zone firing patterns, there were better ways to implement advantages there.

I'd like to suggest setting them to 1200 meter range, while keeping other stats as is.

User avatar
Azaz3l
Brigadier
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sat 1 Oct 2011 10:38
Location: Bus 410
Contact:

Re: MG-42 Range discrepancy

Postby Azaz3l » Sat 20 Jul 2019 00:51

+1, there's no real reason why MG-42 should outrange its 7.62x54R counterparts really.
Image

User avatar
steppewolf
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon 26 Aug 2013 10:38
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: MG-42 Range discrepancy

Postby steppewolf » Sat 20 Jul 2019 01:48

best ww2 MG which was kept in service in an improved version up to present days?

Guggy
General
Posts: 8645
Joined: Thu 17 Nov 2011 02:53
Location: peaceful skeleton realm
Contact:

Re: MG-42 Range discrepancy

Postby Guggy » Sat 20 Jul 2019 05:37

steppewolf wrote:best ww2 MG which was kept in service in an improved version up to present days?


Was it the best because it had a 300 meter range advantage over its opponents though?

User avatar
steppewolf
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon 26 Aug 2013 10:38
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: MG-42 Range discrepancy

Postby steppewolf » Sat 20 Jul 2019 09:39

Guggy wrote:
steppewolf wrote:best ww2 MG which was kept in service in an improved version up to present days?


Was it the best because it had a 300 meter range advantage over its opponents though?


Yes, at least in WW2, its tactical use was brilliant and allowed a much better result than Allied/Soviet HMGs including bigger ranges.

It was a sort of indirect fire tactic developed by Axis infantry which was built around the LMGs and HMGs use. It is called plunging fire, when a machine gun shots targets beyond its usual effective range by aiming above the target and allowing the trajectory of the rounds to fall on enemy targets and this worked great especially with MG42 considering its fantastic rate of fire. This of course required well trained crews.

Of course the Vickers or other water cooled MGs can use plungig fire but considering its much lower ROF, the effect on target would be much different, the first one sending (in game) 157 r/minute while the German one 372 r/minute. Take into consideration the inherent dispersion due to low accuracy and you'll see why German MGs are more effective at range. So this is why I think the devs tried to emphasize by different ranges for different type of MGs.

As the .50 cal is the alpha of mounted MGs, MG42/MG34 should be the alpha of LMGs and HMGs. No allied infantry squad was more effective than Germans at range except maybe US but due to other factors like tactical use of BARs and extensive use of Garands along with more flexible attacking movements.

Image
Source: Gordon L. Rottman World War II Infantry Fire Support Tactics

Do you think it had those sights for that distance for no reason? Germans build a squad around a machine gun, the machine gun suppresses and it kills. While other nations build around rifles, machine guns suppress and rifles kill.

Now, without knowing the hidden stats and without an extensive study of these hidden stats, here is how I think it should look the difference between HMGs in game, making them even more :

Vickers/Schwarzlose:

- long sustained burst due to water cooling mechanism and ROF
- lower range (1000 m)
- better accuracy

MG42

- short bursts due to cooling mechanism and high ROF
- longer range (1500)

MG34 (which had some advantages over MG42s in RL)

- slightly longer bursts than MG42 due to slower ROF but still significantly better than water cooled HMGs
- same range
Rate of fire also affects recoil and as the MG42 has more of both, it too emphasizes the need for good training to use the MG42 and the difference between the bursts.

User avatar
Azaz3l
Brigadier
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sat 1 Oct 2011 10:38
Location: Bus 410
Contact:

Re: MG-42 Range discrepancy

Postby Azaz3l » Sat 20 Jul 2019 13:05

Is there a physical justification why MG42 should outrange its counterparts by a whole 500m apart from "Germans employed better tactics"? Not to mention that the high rate of fire at that range should result in low accuracy.
Image

User avatar
steppewolf
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon 26 Aug 2013 10:38
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: MG-42 Range discrepancy

Postby steppewolf » Sat 20 Jul 2019 13:18

Azaz3l wrote:Is there a physical justification why MG42 should outrange its counterparts by a whole 500m apart from "Germans employed better tactics"? Not to mention that the high rate of fire at that range should result in low accuracy.


see what I said up there. all MGs have bad accuracy at range, all were theoretically able to fire at 1500 m, the thing is that German MGs were able to send almost triple quantity of bullets. From realism POV, MGs were used at that distance because they're effective, had bigger round and were employed in such manner. The others were not able to match MG42 / MG34 although it could have hit the same range, the effect was negligible.

So yes, there is physical justification and try to understand it in a holistic manner, not only the range.

User avatar
Azaz3l
Brigadier
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sat 1 Oct 2011 10:38
Location: Bus 410
Contact:

Re: MG-42 Range discrepancy

Postby Azaz3l » Sat 20 Jul 2019 13:27

To add to this, a "heavy" 7.62mm bullet was specially developed in 1930 by USSR to fire at the distances over 1000m and for indirect fire.

In the 1930s of the 20th century, a concept was developed in the armies of many countries of the world, including the Soviet Union, according to which heavy machine guns had to deal with enemy manpower at distances over 1000 m, including firing from closed firing positions over the head of his troops. Long range shooting made special demands not only on the weapon itself, but also on its ammunition. This required a cartridge with a heavy bullet.

In order to develop its own model of a heavy bullet, in the late 1920s, extensive tests of rifle cartridges with various samples of heavy bullets of an improved form, both in-house and foreign, including rifle cartridges purchased from the USA .30–06 (7, 62-mm) "Springfield" M 1 with a heavy bullet.

As a result, it was decided to develop a domestic 7.62-mm rifle cartridge with a heavy bullet, based on a foreign (in this case - American) sample of a heavy bullet from 1925. The heavy bullet to the rifle cartridge was developed by renowned Soviet small arms designers A. A. Smirnsky and Dobrzhansky. Heavy bullet cartridge "D" (D - long-range) was adopted by the Red Army in 1930 and received the designation "7.62 D hl" (GAU index - 57-D-422 - for cartridges with a brass sleeve) and "7, 62 D gzh "(index - 57-D-423 for cartridges with a heavy (long-range) bullet D and a bimetallic sleeve. The bullet had a mass of 11.8 g and an initial velocity of 800 m / s. The cartridges with a heavy bullet were intended mainly for firing from machine guns (were considered machine-gun cartridges), but their use was also allowed for firing from rifles, carbines and light machine guns [...]

Despite the fact that the accuracy standard for cartridges with a heavy “D” bullet was the same as for cartridges with a “L” light bullet (R50 == 10.5 cm per 300 m), at long range accuracy of a heavy bullet was better than a smaller bullet. The advantage of flattening the trajectory of a heavy bullet over a light one began to show up at a distance of 400 m and increased with increasing distance to the target; already at about 600 m, the heavy bullet “overtook” the light one, while maintaining great speed and, therefore, had more energy and better ballistics. The most effective range of firing rounds with a heavy “D” bullet from 1930 was about 850 m. At this range, the probability of hitting a single target 30 cm high is 10.8%. [...] The heavy bullet “D” pierced the standard army helmet at a distance of 1400 m, while the slaughter action on an unprotected target was maintained at a distance of up to 4500 m. The maximum range of the bullet when shooting from a mounted machine gun “Maxim” was 5000 m. For firing cartridges with a heavy “D” bullet on the stalled Maxim machineguns upgraded in 1930, and subsequently heavy machine guns of Goryunov SG arr. In 1943, the aiming slats had two aiming scales - separately for a light bullet (with the designation - L) and separately for a heavy bullet (with the designation - T).


So the Germans weren't totally the only ones to practice this.
Image

User avatar
steppewolf
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon 26 Aug 2013 10:38
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: MG-42 Range discrepancy

Postby steppewolf » Sat 20 Jul 2019 13:39

Yet it didn't reach the performance of MG42.

Actually it was insanely accurate when you didn't full auto. The standard firing of the MG42 wasn't fully auto, it was 5 round bursts. Any fully automatic gun is going to be inaccurate when you just spray it.

MG42 was able to fire to 3000 meters direct fire, it had the sightings for it. Other MGs were able to do this only with indirect fire. It physical enough to justify the range ?

User avatar
Azaz3l
Brigadier
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sat 1 Oct 2011 10:38
Location: Bus 410
Contact:

Re: MG-42 Range discrepancy

Postby Azaz3l » Sat 20 Jul 2019 13:45

steppewolf wrote:see what I said up there. all MGs have bad accuracy at range, all were theoretically able to fire at 1500 m, the thing is that German MGs were able to send almost triple quantity of bullets.

Yes but then with the high RoF the recoil would be great and readjusting the MG would be harder compared to lower RoF MGs.
steppewolf wrote:From realism POV, MGs were used at that distance because they're effective, had bigger round and were employed in such manner. The others were not able to match MG42 / MG34 although it could have hit the same range, the effect was negligible.

This is simply untrue since special ammunition was also developed for other MGs to be able to fire at long ranges, at least in the Soviet Union. See previous post. I'm pretty sure other countries did this as well.

In the current situation, the Germans not only have superior RoF but also superior accuracy due to accuracy scaling at ranges.

The way I see how stats should be:
Both Allied/German MGs get the same range. Germans get higher RoF but slightly lower accuracy, Allies get higher accuracy but lower RoF.
Image

Return to “Steel Division 2”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests