USMC underated?

KED

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
72
Location
North Carolina
Country
llUnited States
I Cannot complain about the FP values of USMC MMCs. But a range value of 5 is just wrong. Its like they are 2nd line elite units. The range value on the counters should be 6. The late war MMC are fine as are the PA. The early USA units should be a 4-5-7 for the PTO. All of these units were equipped with American 30-06 weapons. Some had better training than others. My question is why did MMP downgrade the USMC for the early years of the war?
 

witchbottles

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
9,100
Reaction score
2,254
Location
Rio Vista, CA
Country
llUnited States
I Cannot complain about the FP values of USMC MMCs. But a range value of 5 is just wrong. Its like they are 2nd line elite units. The range value on the counters should be 6. The late war MMC are fine as are the PA. The early USA units should be a 4-5-7 for the PTO. All of these units were equipped with American 30-06 weapons. Some had better training than others. My question is why did MMP downgrade the USMC for the early years of the war?
guessing overall here, the right man to answer the question definitively is Don Greenwood, you can message him via the WBC website if you prefer.

but the reasons I see are:

1. Marine T/O until Jan 1 , 1943 did not include M1 Garand rifles as a standard issue weapon for line company 0311's.
2. the standard issue SMG until 11-1942 was not the M1A1 Thompson SMG , but the Reising SMG.
3. having a 5-5-8 allowed a sub unit MMC counter type for representing specialist units which existed at the time.( Raiders, ParaMarines, War Dog platoons, etc.)
4. Specialist Units had a lower overall number of assigned T/O M1919A1 BAR's in the line.


An Aside:
USMC Raider units had a standard T/O using the Boys ATR assigned to the Weapons Platoon.

Again simply educated guesses. the progression from 4-6-8 to 6-6-8 to 7-6-8 with self deploy seems very apt overall as far as the game goes.
 

KED

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
72
Location
North Carolina
Country
llUnited States
guessing overall here, the right man to answer the question definitively is Don Greenwood, you can message him via the WBC website if you prefer.

but the reasons I see are:

1. Marine T/O until Jan 1 , 1943 did not include M1 Garand rifles as a standard issue weapon for line company 0311's.
2. the standard issue SMG until 11-1942 was not the M1A1 Thompson SMG , but the Reising SMG.
3. having a 5-5-8 allowed a sub unit MMC counter type for representing specialist units which existed at the time.( Raiders, ParaMarines, War Dog platoons, etc.)
4. Specialist Units had a lower overall number of assigned T/O M1919A1 BAR's in the line.


An Aside:
USMC Raider units had a standard T/O using the Boys ATR assigned to the Weapons Platoon.

Again simply educated guesses. the progression from 4-6-8 to 6-6-8 to 7-6-8 with self deploy seems very apt overall as far as the game goes.
The Garand explains the fire power not the range. Same bullet. Garand, 03, BAR, all the same, IMHO a Marine squad with a range of 5 is still wrong. I think the Germans in front of Paris in WWI Would make a better debate about this than me. Devil Dogs anyone?
,
 

dlazov

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
Messages
7,991
Reaction score
1,377
Location
Toledo, Ohio
First name
Don
Country
llUnited States
I don't think it was Don Greenwood, I think it was Steven Swann, ref: the General and Annuals.
 

Srynerson

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
2,605
Reaction score
367
Location
Denver
Country
llUnited States
Setting aside that it was AHGC that came up with the USMC counter values, I'm assuming part of the rationale for the weaker early war US Army and Marine MMCs would be a "design for effect" solution to make it easier for Japanese forces to successfully go toe-to-toe with them in 1941-42 scenarios.
 

Delirium

ASL Fanatic
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
2,157
Reaction score
461
Location
Wexford
Country
llIreland
5x40 = 200 meters. Didn't the Marines qualify at 300 yards, not 200?
I don't think rifle range qualifying thresholds mattered much when calculating the range factor for any category of ASL squad.

Remember also that long range fire is possible, out to 10 hexes.
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,779
Reaction score
7,203
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
I don't think it was Don Greenwood, I think it was Steven Swann, ref: the General and Annuals.
Credits Section on CoB/GH (from RS):
DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT: Bob McNamara
HISTORICAL RESEARCH: Bob McNamara (with special thanks to Charles Markuss, Charles Pflanz, Hideo Fujigaki, Takeshi Sato, Chris Gammon,
Ryosuke Taniguchi, Dan Murray, Kazunori Imai, Noboru Nishii, Eric Visnowski, Alan Chang, Don Chappell, and Steven C. Swann)
 

witchbottles

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
9,100
Reaction score
2,254
Location
Rio Vista, CA
Country
llUnited States
So Bob's your uncle!!!!

he's about and around in places here and there. You could always try to get a hold of him on it.

@ KED - I am not "Pit- Pate" ( dense chopped liver) when it comes to USMC generally or specifically. You are receiving the viewpoint of a Marine ( aka TeufelHunde).

@ Klas. I interpret the O,P.s question to mean why did MMP accept or reject the range and FP values that TAHGC had assigned when they re - released the product as RS? ( By all means , KED, plese correct this if it is a mistaken interpretation.)

@Eoin, spot on, and I agree 100%. Assignment of values was "design for feel" rather than anything specific in criteria - for all nationalities so far ( The redone Finns remain to be seen)

Steve Swann's articles are a boon of information that KED could find useful. Given that ( and I may again be mistaken, please correct me KED if I am wrong); from previous postings on the PTO topics KED has made, it appears he may not yet have a complete set of old Annuals and Journals to use for reference with these articles, so although the referral is quite valid, it is not quite so useful for KED at the moment without access to the source documents.

A much better resource you can have immediate access to KED is the USMC "Red Books" in html linked format available at Hyperwar on the web ( Official History of the U.S.Marine Corps Operations in World War II, Vol's I through VI is their title). As this website is linked many, many times in the GS Forums already, I'll not add another one here, google is your friend.

Suggest the pre- war sections of Vol I and the operations up to Rendova and the New Georgia Group in Vol II and III.

KRL, Jon H
 

witchbottles

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
9,100
Reaction score
2,254
Location
Rio Vista, CA
Country
llUnited States
Devil Dogs! In front of Paris they were killing Germans at 600 yrds+. (WWI)
ahhh man ,someone quoted the penile attachment....:(

ok for the enlightenment of said penile attachment......

We qualify at 200 yards, 300 yards, and 500 yards in the Known Distance Firing Course with the M16A2 Service Rifle. Those with MOS reason for sidearms further qualify at the 7 and 25 yard lines with their service pistol.

A qualifying unit of fire is:
200 yard line 5 rounds sitting, 5 rounds kneeling, 10 rounds offhand, 10 rounds Rapid fire Standing to sitting.
300 yard line 5 rounds sitting, 10 rounds Kneeling, 10 rounds prone, 10 rounds rapid fire Standing to Prone
500 yard line 10 rounds Prone

you must achieve a combined score minimum to qualify. All stages of fire are slow fire ( single rounds fed in through the action) with a time limit of 1 minute per round of fire; except the rapid fire drills. These are 5 rounds in each of 2 magazines under a time limit of 1 minute total for positioning, firing and magazine change.

You will fire the entire unit of fire every day for 5 consecutive days, only the final firing day can generate a qualifying score.

This is standard Service Rifle qualification. Most line Rifle companies however, deploy with the M4 Carbine rather than M16A2. The shorter barrel and more rapid twist rate destabilizes the 5.56mm NATO round at ranges beyond 250-300 yards.
and you do not qualify with the M4, but you do use it extensively in a familiarization course of "Advanced Infantry Training" for 10 days after graduation of recruit training.

Most clerical MOS's will abbreviate the annual requalification requirement to remove the 500 yard line stage of fire. Everyone however must requalify annually ( deployed Marines are excepted if a Rifle Range is not available, until they return stateside.)

Marine Marksman ( snipers etc) routinely train for 2000+ yard shots, and must qualify with several specialized weapon systems at such long ranges.

Support weapon T/O assigned Marines likewise qualify with their assigned T/O weapons.

KRL, Jon H
 

KED

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
72
Location
North Carolina
Country
llUnited States
All Im asking is if the range values for early USMC MMCs are wrong. All else is good to me. It's just a question. The 03 was a better shooter than the Garand but did not have the fire power. I fired both and they are both fine weapons but at range the 03 shines. Why are not early war German squads 4-5-7? They get a range of 6 but the bulk of the squad is armed with 5 round bolt guns just like the USMC and early US Army.
 

Michael B

Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2011
Messages
949
Reaction score
57
Location
Winterpeg
Country
llCanada
I know the 1944 German rifle squad consisted of an MG42 crew with between 5 and 9 other riflemen, according to Beyond the Beachhead by J M Balkoski. Could the Germans have changed their squad TO&E all that much from 1938?

I pulled the following from http://www.cons.org/redwolf/infantry-toe.html...

It's main weapon is a LMG and one soldier carries a SMG, mainly for self-defense or for movement in built-up areas. The operations of this squad is largely oriented around its LMG. A normal way of operating would be one squad leader, 3 men detached to have the LMG set up somewhere and the remaining 6 men doing "something" under cover of the LMG (after dropping the MG ammo they carried by the MG team).


From this I conclude the answer is no.

IMHO the German squads appear to be a combination of design for effect based on reality. The German Rifle Squad has Area Spray Fire to go with the 6 range. Part of the reason for this must be the presence of the MG34/MG42. I believe we will find the other part of the reasoning comes from doctrinal issues. During the 1930's the Heer was designed by the General Staff for high tempo/low casualty operations out in the country side. Get to the points of decision with as much firepower as the troops are able to carry quickly, and the enemy becomes more agreeable to going home. The 6 range of the German Rifle squad encourages the German player to find places to set up his troops so they are able to engage the enemy at 5 hex range or even farther.

Perhaps the designers of the game wanted us to have the flavour of some of the decisions faced by company and battalion commanders of the day? By assigning the values that they have to the counters involved, the designers encourage the ASL player to adjustment his playing style to fit the available resources.
 

Thunderchief

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2003
Messages
1,198
Reaction score
739
Location
Canberra, Australia
Country
llAustralia
All Im asking is if the range values for early USMC MMCs are wrong. All else is good to me. It's just a question. The 03 was a better shooter than the Garand but did not have the fire power. I fired both and they are both fine weapons but at range the 03 shines. Why are not early war German squads 4-5-7? They get a range of 6 but the bulk of the squad is armed with 5 round bolt guns just like the USMC and early US Army.
I'm guessing that since the counters and scenarios are already printed that we'll just have to accept it and get on with the GAME. :p
 

witchbottles

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
9,100
Reaction score
2,254
Location
Rio Vista, CA
Country
llUnited States
USMC Rifle Squad circa June 1941

Squad Leader - armed with M1903A3
BAR Gunner - Armed with a M1919A1 BAR
Assistant BAR Gunner - Armed with a M1903A3
Seven Marine Riflemen - Armed with M1903A3

HEERE Infanterie Squad, circa Jan 1941:

Corporal or Senior Sergeant - Squad Leader - T/O is an MP of various types actually issued ( ie a SMG)
Corporal - Assistant Squad Leader - armed with a Kar-98k
Machine Gunner - armed with a MG- 34 ( or Czech ZB series)
Assistant Machine Gunner - armed with a Kar-98k
Scharfshutze - armed with a scoped Kar-98k
Four to six Riflemen - all armed with the Kar - 98k

Differences I see off - hand in long range firepower:

The LMG can generate at least twice the long range stabilized firepower of any BAR.

Having a scoped weapon in the T/O at this level gives the ability of long range aimed slow fire.

the 7.92mm x 57 FMJ round has a much lower rate of bullet drop beyond 300 yards compared to the .30-06 ball round. Bullet drop at 300 yards for the .06 is 6 inches. the Mauser drops less than 4. Long range ballistics are overall better for the Mauser. Terminal impact ballistics for the Mauser show it generates a very slight margin less impact energy transfer at 500 yards or more. ( the .06 can punch harder, and kill slightly better , at 500 yards +, at the price of a rapidly dropping trajectory.)

Both rounds are inherently lethal, if well aimed, at ranges up to 800 yards to unprotected human targets. ( there is enough remaining energy to transfer to cause a sufficient wound channel that will create a lethal wound in > 50% of the impacted targets at that range, under aimed fire conditions ( ie a center mass hit)).

As for the counters themselves, I do not think MMP at any time would have had or thought sufficient reason or justification existed to examine the various factors assigned those units that came with RS, certainly not from a standpoint of possibly either updating or changing them. ( I may be mistaken, and would gladly retract the statement if Perry or Chas noted that they had indeed examined the counter values for the infantry with an eye to correcting, modifying, or changing them pre - production.)

As I always note, if the majority of primary sources point out that this rifle platoon was routinely engaging enemy targets at ranges in excess of 300 yards, then SSR ing in a change for that scenario is the proper solution. But doing so in my view would require a correlation of data rather than a single source. ( The single source would, in essence, make me dig for more information to either correlate or refute it.)

KRL, Jon H
 

M.Koch

Grenadier TD
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Messages
2,555
Reaction score
988
Location
Germany
Country
llGermany
Why are not early war German squads 4-5-7? They get a range of 6 but the bulk of the squad is armed with 5 round bolt guns just like the USMC and early US Army.
Fire discipline and superior training maybe ?
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
2,011
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
Hate to pour water on things...and I wish Paul M. Weir was here to give his recount of this, as he has in other threads he explains it much better than I can. The game is built on a foundation of sand, so if you wanna start poking about here is what you get,... the game (ASL) is based off leftover counters from a Napoleonic game. It was not based off analysis like that being quoted in various posts above with careful refinement and consideration and long range planning into TO/E developments over the course of the war. John Hill had left over 4-4 counters used to depict 19thC warfare, these then became the basis of the Russian 4-4-7 squad, that squad was then the bench mark by which other squads were 'invented' rather than say designed. This point of origin point explains vagaries in the system.

Also I don't think as SL moved to ASL that designers at all envisioned how far the system would be driven by our interests and desire for more nuances in MMC types. Had they had a better inkling of this then they may have started over as it was they carried SL values into ASL.

The emperor has no clothes, either look away and play on happily as most of us and be content with how things are or stare in horror and mutter about what might have been or should have been....

It is what it is. Is it smack dab perfect, no, close, no, a great game, yup. Carry on...
 

Danno

Ost Front Fanatic
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
1,472
Reaction score
873
Location
Land of OZ
Country
llUnited States
Hate to pour water on things...and I wish Paul M. Weir was here to give his recount of this, as he has in other threads he explains it much better than I can. The game is built on a foundation of sand, so if you wanna start poking about here is what you get,... the game (ASL) is based off leftover counters from a Napoleonic game. It was not based off analysis like that being quoted in various posts above with careful refinement and consideration and long range planning into TO/E developments over the course of the war. John Hill had left over 4-4 counters used to depict 19thC warfare, these then became the basis of the Russian 4-4-7 squad, that squad was then the bench mark by which other squads were 'invented' rather than say designed. This point of origin point explains vagaries in the system.

Also I don't think as SL moved to ASL that designers at all envisioned how far the system would be driven by our interests and desire for more nuances in MMC types. Had they had a better inkling of this then they may have started over as it was they carried SL values into ASL.

The emperor has no clothes, either look away and play on happily as most of us and be content with how things are or stare in horror and mutter about what might have been or should have been....

It is what it is. Is it smack dab perfect, no, close, no, a great game, yup. Carry on...
Andy has the right of it. It is what it is.

Historically weapons and training (especially marksmanship training) allowed the capability of hitting targets with lethal fire out to 1000-2000 meters depending on the weapon. However studies of actual combat showed units actually engaged well under the maximum ranges. Averaging between 200-300 meters in the majority of firefights. There are many reasons for this primary is the value of concealment in actual combat.

This was the reason the development of shorter rounds with less range were developed based on combat from WWII. The German Kurtz round and MP-44 are directly related to those findings. Leading to the Russian M-1943 round and AK-47 developed for that round and Russian combat experience. US then went to the smaller (but higher kinetic energy) round for the M-16.

Basically troops did not engage at maximum range.

Also ranges are short in the system because as Andy points out the initial decision was not a historical/technical analysis. I would add that most ASL games are won by movement and maneuver or lack thereof...not by firepower or range. So the design effect matches history and thus make the game system work.

It is what it is...and it works. Applying technical/historical analysis does not apply.

Danno
 
Top