kaiserluger
Warrior
319 Posts
    
 | | 07/08/2005 7:17 PM |
| | recovered topic 5698 | |
Kaiserluger - | |
|
kaiserluger
Warrior
319 Posts
| | 07/08/2005 7:17 PM |
| I notice the artilery has a speed of 0, but has speed 2 during the assault phase. I wonder if a vehicle can move this via towing etc?
I really like the machine gunner sculpt! | |
Kaiserluger - | |
|
striderlotr
Commander
3370 Posts
| | 07/08/2005 8:20 PM |
| | YES! 3 for one preview!!! | |
Sean Banks
Champion of Elementals
Official Organizer
Gen Con 05 maxminis Event | Winterfantasy 06 maxminis Event | Gen Con 06 maxminis Event | Winterfantasy 07 Community Event | |
|
striderlotr
Commander
3370 Posts
| | 07/08/2005 8:22 PM |
| | And they are infantry and weapons! More then just tanks. | |
Sean Banks
Champion of Elementals
Official Organizer
Gen Con 05 maxminis Event | Winterfantasy 06 maxminis Event | Gen Con 06 maxminis Event | Winterfantasy 07 Community Event | |
|
Sean-Khan
Commander
2731 Posts
| |
2005 D&D Miniatures Champion
Fenris
Sergeant
974 Posts
| | 07/09/2005 12:02 AM |
| VERY cool preview. Nice to see some non-vehicles.
But, umm. Maybe I've been looking at too much internet porn, but umm, does that picture of the mortar unit seem rather... suggestive... to you?
I thought this was going to be a family game! ;) | |
Read my championship tournament report.
Successful trades:
xBrendanx | Cha0tic G0od | ThatOneGuy | BrazenWood | Finley | Arris | Drift x2 | Neonmage | Cthulu's Librarian | Kalvos | PatEllis15 | Paradox1995 | Rhane | Gildogg | Darthrau | Vrecknidj x2 | erian_7 | Octavius Drowslayer x2 | stheis | Garate | thenameless | Lucky_ksu | ckissee | Corim Danex | Schooly_D | Username | |
|
Fry
Underboss
1724 Posts
| | 07/09/2005 11:34 AM |
| Yay! I've loved the MG42 for quite some time now.
Question: in the historical discussion of the MG42, they say
"it had a maximum effective range of 500 meters -- in indirect fire mode, the maximum effective range was 3,500 meters."
Indirect fire on a machinegun? Whaaaaa? Any history buffs that can explain that to me? | |
"Why am I all sticky and naked? Did I miss something fun?"
-Vindicated champion of Tordek, Dwarf Champion | |
|
Retired Tank
Vulturedoodle
Sergeant
791 Posts
| | 07/09/2005 2:36 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Fry
Yay! I've loved the MG42 for quite some time now.
Question: in the historical discussion of the MG42, they say
"it had a maximum effective range of 500 meters -- in indirect fire mode, the maximum effective range was 3,500 meters."
Indirect fire on a machinegun? Whaaaaa? Any history buffs that can explain that to me?
I found the following paragraph here:
http://www.rap4.com/forum/index.php/topic,4586.new.html
The MG42 was a simpler design to replace the MG34 to allow for the possibility of mass production at relatively low cost. The MG42 had an effective direct-fire range of 500 meters (546.7 yards) and an indirect-fire range of 3,500 meters (3,826.7 yards) w/ a cyclic rate of 1,200-1,500 rpm. It weighed in @ 11.5 kg (25.35 lbs) w/ bipod and @ 32.0 kg (70.55 lbs) w/ Lafette 42 tripod. It was lighter than the MG34 with both the bipod and tripod.
This sounds awfully close to the preview language. I'm not very knowledgeable on this subject...my supposition is that indirect fire was simply suppressive fire, at which this particular machine gun excelled. I did find numerous references to the "almost lost art of indirect machine gun fire," including the following description of a WWI machine gun, the Vickers 0.303:
It had a cyclic rate of fire of 600 rounds a minute, but the practical rate of fire was nearer to 250 rounds a minute. It used a 250-round fabric belt and had a reputation for reliability when its contemporaries had a tendency to jam. Its maximum range was 4500 yards, but the maximum effective range was 2000 yards. Gun and water (for cooling) weighed 40lbs and the tripod 51lbs. It was capable of indirect fire (target unseen) at long range, rather like an artillery piece.
So, yes, it appears there is, or was, such a use for machine guns.
Regards,
Steve F. | |
Vaughan: You seem like a thinker. You seem to always be deep in thought. So what are you thinking right now?
Karl: I'm thinking I could use some more o' that potted meat, if you got any extry.
H/W List <|>Trades
| |
|
Wrackspawn
ChristopherGroves
Warlord
6093 Posts
| |
Sean-Khan
Commander
2731 Posts
| |
striderlotr
Commander
3370 Posts
| | 07/11/2005 4:43 PM |
| | Very nice. So we can transport and move at a quicker pace... Although getting into range of that machinegun does not sound like fun. | |
Sean Banks
Champion of Elementals
Official Organizer
Gen Con 05 maxminis Event | Winterfantasy 06 maxminis Event | Gen Con 06 maxminis Event | Winterfantasy 07 Community Event | |
|
NightMoor
Sergeant
448 Posts
| | 08/04/2005 2:24 AM |
| Just thought I'd bump this old thread up to clarify, now that we have the advanced rules, that the Pak38 Antitank gun *can't* be transported since artillery units are barred from being transported at all.
Thank god for that. Nightmares of ridiculous "tank/artillery drop" from Wizkids' Mechwarrior game started dancing in my head for a while there... | |
| |
|
Avatar of the Tank
Newtoncain
Commander
2985 Posts
Land of 10,000 taxes
| | 08/04/2005 6:41 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by NightMoor
Just thought I'd bump this old thread up to clarify, now that we have the advanced rules, that the Pak38 Antitank gun *can't* be transported since artillery units are barred from being transported at all.
Thank god for that. Nightmares of ridiculous "tank/artillery drop" from Wizkids' Mechwarrior game started dancing in my head for a while there...
Amen to that, yet another reason I got out of TankDrop warrior. | |
They just don't know what's good in life...Conan, tell them what is good in life.
To rip the boosters. To count the minis spilled out before you, and to hear the indifference of the women... | |
|
XAos
Underboss
2413 Posts
London
| | 08/04/2005 7:01 AM |
| I read an account of a german attempt to destroy a KV-1 early in the barbarossa campaign. Which included loosing an 88mm gun while it was unlimbering in LoS of the tank. Eventually the tank ran out of ammo. But until then, that road was blocked.
Unlimbering guns infront of the enemy was fine, with horse artillery V's smooth bore muskets[:o)] Against better weapons it could get the gunners very dead. | | | |
|
Retired Tank
Vulturedoodle
Sergeant
791 Posts
| | 08/04/2005 11:19 AM |
| Since we're resurrecting old threads, I found an interesting link about the Vickers MG:
http://www.nzetc.org/tm/scholarly/tei-WH2-27Ba-b1.html
It mentions MG indirect fire:
"The Vickers also could be used as an offensive weapon: it
could give the infantry covering fire before, during and after
an advance. With overhead, indirect and night fire it could
harass the known and suspected enemy positions and lines of
communication before the attack, support the attacking infantry
by firing on roads, houses or other targets ahead of the artillery
barrage, or along the flanks of the advance, and on call from
the infantry could engage points which might be holding up
the advance; it could go forward to support the reorganisation
immediately the objective had been taken, and could help to
break up any counter-attack the enemy might attempt."
A poster on the Flames of War site also commented that, "The indirect machinegun fire is still in use today, I went to an army reserve information day (australian army) and was talking to a reservist who operates the M60 light machine guns, and he explained how they fired them over a hill to hit targets on the other side. It was the first time i'd heard of something like that happening."
Another poster described his own experiences with indirect fire: "Whilst operating the targets on the firing range I stupidly left the butts to take a pee and was hit in the shoulder from a sterling smg 9mm round this was fired from the adjoining range from around 300yds away. it knocked me to the ground but the worst I suffered was a huge bruise to my upper shoulder spreading to my chest which lasted for 4 weeks. So my argument is that although you could conceivably fire out to 48 inches yoiu probably wouldn't kill anything, although you would keep the enemies heads down."
Interesting stuff.
Regards,
Steve F. | |
Vaughan: You seem like a thinker. You seem to always be deep in thought. So what are you thinking right now?
Karl: I'm thinking I could use some more o' that potted meat, if you got any extry.
H/W List <|>Trades
| |
|