What would you arm your troops with?
- Thread starter selector67
- Start date
- Status
woops misunderstood the question
I would arm everyone with full auto M1 carbines. And toss in a few garands per squad to provide long range ability. And at least 2 bazookas per squad.
I would arm everyone with full auto M1 carbines. And toss in a few garands per squad to provide long range ability. And at least 2 bazookas per squad.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 22,556
Sturmgewehr MP-44 is my first choice. FG-42 (later model) my second choice for rifle.
Russian PPsH submachinegun with its high capacity magazine. Cheap and easier to make than the venerable Thompson. Lighter too so your soljers can carry more ammo.
MG-42 for light machine gun. A real bullet hose.
M-2 for heavy machine gun. When you have to punch through concrete.
Pistol? I like the 1911 of course (so what if the pistol ammo and smg ammo aren't compatible. It's my army, my loyal troops will have to worry about that).
Sniper Rifle: No 4 MK 1(T). Rugged w/decent scope for its time. Highly accurate. Runner up would be the Moisin Nagant 91/30 with PEM scope. Forget the M1903A4. That sorry Weaver M73B scope SUCKED.
Russian PPsH submachinegun with its high capacity magazine. Cheap and easier to make than the venerable Thompson. Lighter too so your soljers can carry more ammo.
MG-42 for light machine gun. A real bullet hose.
M-2 for heavy machine gun. When you have to punch through concrete.
Pistol? I like the 1911 of course (so what if the pistol ammo and smg ammo aren't compatible. It's my army, my loyal troops will have to worry about that).
Sniper Rifle: No 4 MK 1(T). Rugged w/decent scope for its time. Highly accurate. Runner up would be the Moisin Nagant 91/30 with PEM scope. Forget the M1903A4. That sorry Weaver M73B scope SUCKED.
I can't lay aside my fave WW2 weapon, the BAR so I'd issue it like the Marines did at 2-3 per sqaud alongside the M-1 rifle. One Designated marksman per sqaud has an M1C sniper rifle. (Note just after the war there was an attempt to make the M1 use BAR magazines, that would have been a substantial advantage if it worked)
I'd drop the M-1 Carbine in favor of a cheap easy to produce smg on the lines of a STEN or PPSH or Grease Gun in .45 cal, to go alongside the issued .45 cal 1911a1 or 1917 series revolver. Bottom line is though, if the troops want a pistol they can have one, I'll be happy to look the other way if a soldier picks up a captured pistol, and even let him take it home hassle free. You could even bring your own but you better bring your own ammo if it's not 45 acp. The thompson was cool but it was pricy and heavy. The carbine was a stop gap to replace a $$ to produce pistol, not a mainline rifle. So a cheap as all heck burp gun should do the trick.
Medium MG = 30-06 cal MG42. (if it were possible, the quick change barrel is the key here)
Heavy MG = Ma Duece
that would allow me only 2 kinds of ammo to worry about, and only 1 kind of rifle mag and 1 kind of smg mag.
Truth is, had the technological advances of the STG 44 happned in the 30's MOST countries would have fielded a similar rifle, short action, select fire intermediate cartridge and done away with the SMG completely. The US rifle would look more like a Mini-30 than an M1 carbine, based on a cut-down 30-06 round. SMG's or SAWs would be heavier barrel versions of existing rifles ala AK/RPK. Handguns would be mostly an afterthought, though the BHP would have certainly caught on as THE pistol of european nations. US troops would still pack a .45.
I'd drop the M-1 Carbine in favor of a cheap easy to produce smg on the lines of a STEN or PPSH or Grease Gun in .45 cal, to go alongside the issued .45 cal 1911a1 or 1917 series revolver. Bottom line is though, if the troops want a pistol they can have one, I'll be happy to look the other way if a soldier picks up a captured pistol, and even let him take it home hassle free. You could even bring your own but you better bring your own ammo if it's not 45 acp. The thompson was cool but it was pricy and heavy. The carbine was a stop gap to replace a $$ to produce pistol, not a mainline rifle. So a cheap as all heck burp gun should do the trick.
Medium MG = 30-06 cal MG42. (if it were possible, the quick change barrel is the key here)
Heavy MG = Ma Duece
that would allow me only 2 kinds of ammo to worry about, and only 1 kind of rifle mag and 1 kind of smg mag.
Truth is, had the technological advances of the STG 44 happned in the 30's MOST countries would have fielded a similar rifle, short action, select fire intermediate cartridge and done away with the SMG completely. The US rifle would look more like a Mini-30 than an M1 carbine, based on a cut-down 30-06 round. SMG's or SAWs would be heavier barrel versions of existing rifles ala AK/RPK. Handguns would be mostly an afterthought, though the BHP would have certainly caught on as THE pistol of european nations. US troops would still pack a .45.
lionking
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2006
- Messages
- 3,109
really what this is doing is letting members list their favorite weapons and what they considered the best.
to answer the question a little more realistic,the question would be who do you consider had the superior smallarms of WWII?Which overall I'd say the Americans.
Tanks,well that would be another matter.
to answer the question a little more realistic,the question would be who do you consider had the superior smallarms of WWII?Which overall I'd say the Americans.
Tanks,well that would be another matter.
ok, for mine, I would try to simplify logistics for US forces:
Service Rifle: M1 Garand (rechambered in 8mm Mauser)
Sniper Rifle: Kar98k (8mm Mauser)
LMG: MG42 (8mm Mauser)
HMG: M2 (.50BMG)
SMG: PPSH-41 (rechambered in .45acp)
Pistol: 1911 (.45acp)
I would have included the stg44, but due to reliablity problems, and its appearance late in the war, I don't think it would have had the bugs worked out like the M1 Garand. I like the 8mm Mauser round due to its powerful ball loading (greater than .30-06 M2 ball) and slightly wider diameter bullet. Up to company-level, these weapons in these chamberings would simplify logististics greatly, meaning other than the crew-served M2 Browning heavy machinegun, only 2 calibers would be used by servicemen in all weapons, making ressupply easier.
Service Rifle: M1 Garand (rechambered in 8mm Mauser)
Sniper Rifle: Kar98k (8mm Mauser)
LMG: MG42 (8mm Mauser)
HMG: M2 (.50BMG)
SMG: PPSH-41 (rechambered in .45acp)
Pistol: 1911 (.45acp)
I would have included the stg44, but due to reliablity problems, and its appearance late in the war, I don't think it would have had the bugs worked out like the M1 Garand. I like the 8mm Mauser round due to its powerful ball loading (greater than .30-06 M2 ball) and slightly wider diameter bullet. Up to company-level, these weapons in these chamberings would simplify logististics greatly, meaning other than the crew-served M2 Browning heavy machinegun, only 2 calibers would be used by servicemen in all weapons, making ressupply easier.
Rifle: M1 Garand .30-06
LMG/GPMG: MG42 .30-06
SMG: M3 Greasegun .45ACP
Pistol: M1911A1 .45ACP
In my army there'd be no M1 carbine. It would just simplify logistics to issue M3s instead.
LMG/GPMG: MG42 .30-06
SMG: M3 Greasegun .45ACP
Pistol: M1911A1 .45ACP
In my army there'd be no M1 carbine. It would just simplify logistics to issue M3s instead.
I am not so sure we had better leadership. I think the german generals were quite good. They just had Hitler and were outnumbered on a massive scale.
I am not sure I would want to change any or the weapons as that would be tempting fate.
We did have a huge amount of variety and that was both good and bad. Every squad had long range reach and at least the capability to fight close.
If we had less variety we could have cranked out more stuff but we ended up making too much stuff as it is. Logistics would have been eased with less variety but in some ways I think the variety made our forces more dangerous to the enemy.
I am not sure I would want to change any or the weapons as that would be tempting fate.
We did have a huge amount of variety and that was both good and bad. Every squad had long range reach and at least the capability to fight close.
If we had less variety we could have cranked out more stuff but we ended up making too much stuff as it is. Logistics would have been eased with less variety but in some ways I think the variety made our forces more dangerous to the enemy.
I just know Im going to get some flack for this...
1. Infantry rifle- Probably the M1 - if the Surm 44 isn't available.
Of course, that provides an entirely different ammunition logistics problem... and it depends on what kind of infantry I want to have, too (ones that can shoot, or ones that can not)? It all depends on my country's culture and military training.
2.Pistol- The 1911; I can't think of a better-suited weapon for the role. An M1 Carbine would just get in the way for officers who need their hands for other things.
3.Submachinegun - PPSh-41, working from the basis that a submachine gunner is going to be primarily tasked with providing moving cover fire, and an enemy soldier isn't going to care much if the bullet hitting him is a fast, .30 cal or a slow, .45 cal. But the soldier carrying the ammo, probably will prefer the smaller bullets. And the gun itself isn't as heavy or awkward as a Thompson.
Alternatively, an M3 in .45.
I've no thoughts on the machine guns, other than that I'm undecided and conflicted. On one hand, the Germans (supposedly) had the best machine guns during WWII, because they were a large part of their focus. For us, however, they were an after thought; HOWEVER, JMB designed our's, which is a point of conflict, because we all know that JMB didn't design junk.
1. Infantry rifle- Probably the M1 - if the Surm 44 isn't available.
Of course, that provides an entirely different ammunition logistics problem... and it depends on what kind of infantry I want to have, too (ones that can shoot, or ones that can not)? It all depends on my country's culture and military training. 2.Pistol- The 1911; I can't think of a better-suited weapon for the role. An M1 Carbine would just get in the way for officers who need their hands for other things.
3.Submachinegun - PPSh-41, working from the basis that a submachine gunner is going to be primarily tasked with providing moving cover fire, and an enemy soldier isn't going to care much if the bullet hitting him is a fast, .30 cal or a slow, .45 cal.
But the soldier carrying the ammo, probably will prefer the smaller bullets. And the gun itself isn't as heavy or awkward as a Thompson.Alternatively, an M3 in .45.
I've no thoughts on the machine guns, other than that I'm undecided and conflicted. On one hand, the Germans (supposedly) had the best machine guns during WWII, because they were a large part of their focus. For us, however, they were an after thought; HOWEVER, JMB designed our's, which is a point of conflict, because we all know that JMB didn't design junk.
Each man would have an MG-34 duct taped to each arm. To allow this they would have to train in the gym during boot camp to build up bicep and upper body strength.
A second man would follow him to help feed, reload, carry extra belts, etc... he would carry a Tokarev so he could shoot himself in case he were about to be taken prisoner.
A second man would follow him to help feed, reload, carry extra belts, etc... he would carry a Tokarev so he could shoot himself in case he were about to be taken prisoner.
Infantry rifle- Mosin Nagant
Pistol- Luger
Submachinegun- PPSH
Light machinegun- MP44
Machinegun- MG-42
Pistol- Luger
Submachinegun- PPSH
Light machinegun- MP44
Machinegun- MG-42
Infantry Rifle-SKS Tough, and better suited to a light squad then even the Garand IMO. STG would be best, but it had its problems.
Pistol-M1911
Subgun-PPSH For use with Sniper and MG crews
DMR-M1c w/ 4x scope, issued fairly heavily
Sniper Rifle-03 Springfield w/ Unertyl 8x
SAW-BAR Issued more like the Marines then the Army.
MG-MG-42 Centerpiece of unit
HMG-M2 Germans didnt have any real counterpart, the russian design is good but a little heavy for a mobile unit.
Tactics based around MG's, NOT rifle squads.
Pistol-M1911
Subgun-PPSH For use with Sniper and MG crews
DMR-M1c w/ 4x scope, issued fairly heavily
Sniper Rifle-03 Springfield w/ Unertyl 8x
SAW-BAR Issued more like the Marines then the Army.
MG-MG-42 Centerpiece of unit
HMG-M2 Germans didnt have any real counterpart, the russian design is good but a little heavy for a mobile unit.
Tactics based around MG's, NOT rifle squads.
Infantry Rifle: M1 Garand in the original chambering of .276
Pistol: Radom in .45 ACP
SMG: PPsh41 in 7.62x25
LMG: Bren in .276
GPMG: MG-42 in .276
Never said the country I was leading was the United States, therefore I have no qualms about not using the nonexistent stockpile of .30-06 I don't already have during the Depression my country is not in.
Radoms, because I think they're cool. Same with the PPsh41.
Pistol: Radom in .45 ACP
SMG: PPsh41 in 7.62x25
LMG: Bren in .276
GPMG: MG-42 in .276
Never said the country I was leading was the United States, therefore I have no qualms about not using the nonexistent stockpile of .30-06 I don't already have during the Depression my country is not in.
Radoms, because I think they're cool.
Same with the PPsh41.I am surprised at all the people who picked the BAR. You have an overly complex support weapon with a very limited magazine that you couldn't switch out the barrel when its heated up making the time it can fire fairly limited.
The BAR was good for WW1 but by the time WW2 came around its really outdated and used primarly because they didn't bother creating anything better.
Though for your game I would say the following.
The StG44 or even the SKS as the primarly infantry weapons (though maybe stick on better sights on the last).
Pistol: Probrobly the M1911a1.
LMG: Bren. Portability of the BAR with none of the problems associated and with a larger magazine, barrel changing ability and a design that would stay in use into the Gulf War.
HMG: The M2. Nothing quite compares to it.
SMG: Suomi KP/-31. Had all the firepower of the Thompson but far more reliable and tougher to break with a massive magazine and much lighter too. If they could have cleaned up the STEN's magazines that would have been higher up too.
The BAR was good for WW1 but by the time WW2 came around its really outdated and used primarly because they didn't bother creating anything better.
Though for your game I would say the following.
The StG44 or even the SKS as the primarly infantry weapons (though maybe stick on better sights on the last).
Pistol: Probrobly the M1911a1.
LMG: Bren. Portability of the BAR with none of the problems associated and with a larger magazine, barrel changing ability and a design that would stay in use into the Gulf War.
HMG: The M2. Nothing quite compares to it.
SMG: Suomi KP/-31. Had all the firepower of the Thompson but far more reliable and tougher to break with a massive magazine and much lighter too. If they could have cleaned up the STEN's magazines that would have been higher up too.
A few Welrod pistols is all they would need. And I would send them after the parasitic classes, not to pointlessly kill millions of civilians and draftees.
Here's a review of Killing Hitler, for those who haven't read it.
Here's a review of Killing Hitler, for those who haven't read it.
Rifle- SAFN
Pistol- Browning Hi-Power
SMG- PPSh-41
LMG- Fusil Automatique Modele 1930 (Modifed BAR by FN)
GPMG-MG-42
Pistol- Browning Hi-Power
SMG- PPSh-41
LMG- Fusil Automatique Modele 1930 (Modifed BAR by FN)
GPMG-MG-42
wow, an old one!
I'd figure out how to issue
Battlerifle:
I vote FG42
Rifle:
some sort of 12 rounded K31 esque monstrosity
Subgun:
something like a thompson, but in 7.62x25; and with more ergonomics in mind
Pistol:
totally reinvented nambu in like 7.62x25
Course, if it were really my own fantasy, my armies would use Blastec E-11s and ride bears that spit fire.
I'd figure out how to issue Battlerifle:
I vote FG42
Rifle:
some sort of 12 rounded K31 esque monstrosity
Subgun:
something like a thompson, but in 7.62x25; and with more ergonomics in mind
Pistol:
totally reinvented nambu in like 7.62x25
Course, if it were really my own fantasy, my armies would use Blastec E-11s and ride bears that spit fire.
1. Infantry rifle -- M1 Garand. It was, hands down, the best battle rifle of it's time. Just to throw some gas on the fire, the StG 44 is not a battle rifle. Even its name declares it an assault rifle, so it's not even in competition with the M1 as a battle rifle. But I would stick to arming my troops with a battle rifle.
2.Pistol -- LOL 1911A1, as if you even have to ask. . .
3.Submachinegun. -- It's a little nebulous, but the M2 Carbine. Entered service a few months after the StG44. 30 round magazine, full auto capable, and the round runs a little less than 100 fps slower than the 8mm short. Could be called an SMG, or an assault rifle.
4.Light machinegun -- Mmm, have to go with the BREN here
5.Medium machine gun or GPMG -- MG-42, preferrably in .30'06. It's strong enough for the conversion seeing as how the 7.92 JS was more powerful than the '06.
Added:
6.Heavy Machinegun -- M2 OF COURSE!!
How about:
Pistol: P-35 Hi-Powers with the detachable buttstock...added effectiveness.
SMG: PPSH-41 -- Issued to 50% of the the troops.
Trench Shotgun: Winchester 1897 w/ Bayonet
Battle Rifle/Designated Marksman Rifle--- M1C Garand
Sniper Rifle --- Scoped K31's
Light Machine Gun- MG-42
Heavy Machine Gun- M2 Browning
Pistol: P-35 Hi-Powers with the detachable buttstock...added effectiveness.
SMG: PPSH-41 -- Issued to 50% of the the troops.
Trench Shotgun: Winchester 1897 w/ Bayonet
Battle Rifle/Designated Marksman Rifle--- M1C Garand
Sniper Rifle --- Scoped K31's
Light Machine Gun- MG-42
Heavy Machine Gun- M2 Browning
Service rifle: FG-42
LMG: Bren in 8mm Mauser
GPMG: MG-42
HMG: M2HB
SMG: ppsh-43
Side arm: ppsh-43
Actually I'd pick this mix for NOW as well.
LMG: Bren in 8mm Mauser
GPMG: MG-42
HMG: M2HB
SMG: ppsh-43
Side arm: ppsh-43
Actually I'd pick this mix for NOW as well.
Last edited:
I agree and when I spent 8 years in Germany, I had lots of discussions with German veterans. They also stated that if Germany would have kept their pact with Russia and not attacked that the outcome would/could have been a lot different. I mean I am glad that this never happened but it would be a different world today if they would not have invaded Russia
I thing we are armed well enough. I would allow out troops to shoot first and ask questions later.
- Status