Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
old gamer

MACHINE GUNS

Recommended Posts

Yes, each MG crew would contribute to the squad's firepower. So a squad consisting of 2 American MG crews would have a firepower of 6 (against infantry); It would be a firepower of 8 for 2 German MG crews.

To do this may be tempting. But remember that it will only take 2 hits to eliminate that squad. And any such squad will be targeted by your opponent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ghengisgarber said:

 

Bunkers are why flame throwers were invented. The dble mg cannot mele , will cause no casualities and has no cover from flame throwers. Results are usually one dead dble mg.

 

 

Why wouln't MG's be able to defend against an assault? (I guess that's what you meant by melee)? I found no rule on this. A double mortar squad would be screwed when assaulted though, because they can't attack an adjacent hex and assaults are from adjacent hexes. Maybe you thought that this rule applies to all heavy weapons? Or that because heavy weapons can't assault, MG's can't defend against one either? True, MG's can't take an assault action, but there is no reason why they shouldn't be able to defend against an assault.

That being said, a double MG would indeed be toast when assaulted by flamethrowers, but would also inflict heavy casualties themselves (as losses happen simultaneously in an assault). So better suppress those MG's first!...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Original question on double machine guns was checking to see if firepower was doubled. Have not  used this set up yet.  Would be interesting if played in some situations, such as defending a certain isolated position or with a squad with an officer present. Suppresive fire would do the same amount of damage to a mixed squad just as it would to a squad with a double machine gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Rat Patrol allows for some doubling up on machine guns. This scenario also allows for unit spec to be assigned to MG's.

Give them a recon token and they are immune to long range attacks. I sat mine on the hill on map 16A giving them increased range. they were able to plug away with long range shots at troops in the buildings softening them up for an assault. still only hit on a six, but with six dice themselves they did pretty good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea they have with the MG's. The way I look at it is a single MG simulates a light MG and a double a Heavy. Heavy being more suited to bunker duty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hefsgaard said:

Can Heavy weapons squads be given Abilitiechits in that scenario?

That's what he wrote, so yes:

The Hungarian said:

Rat Patrol allows for some doubling up on machine guns. This scenario also allows for unit spec to be assigned to MG's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ghengisgarber said:

Bunkers in the Normandy expansion can only fire out in defined arcs, they would not be able to defend against an assault from the flank or rear, so they would be crispy critters and do no damage.

Only true if the squad uses the built-in MG of the bunker. But a squad inside may ignore this, and still benefit from the cover. So there's a double MG-squad sitting in a 8-cover-bunker, able to be in Op Fire (which the built-in one can't) and mow down anything in any direction with much limited risk on getting hit, compared to (e.g.) an entrenchment or house.

Still, it's pretty easy possible to have it killed quickly with combined fire attempts, esp. from elite squads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that the arc of fire restriction applies to anything attempting to fire, not just the built in MG. The reason , these bunkers were built to defend from the sea, not from the rear, they had no means to defend against rear attacks unless the men inside opened the door and came out. Many were actually knocked out by attacks from the rear. As I recall in the reading I have done, 4 different books, one by Stephen Ambrose, the only bunkers knocked out from the front were KO'd by U.S. destroyers moving in to just off the beach and blasting them away by direct fire with their 6 inch guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ghengisgarber said:

...these bunkers were built to defend from the sea, not from the rear, they had no means to defend against rear attacks unless the men inside opened the door and came out.

 

 

Not quite true.  Bunkers were designed to prevent rear attacks.  They usually had a mounted (and well protected) MG that covered the approach.  Not an easy task to get past but decidedly more so than a frontal assault!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...