BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

What Are the differences between them? Until now i only found that AAMGs fire Anti air, What Do the other MGs mean and what they do?

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

BMG = hull mg
CMG = coaxial mg (next to main gun)
AAMG = antiair mg
TMG - turret mg (mg as main weapon in turret)

Tells the game how to treat that specific mg as each category has it's own characteristics.

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

Thx, Now i can choose better tanks for their roles

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

BMG actually stands for Bow MG, being mounted in front of the hull. This gave the radio operator/assistant driver something to shoot while in combat. However, these were usually only useful at relatively close ranges (reflected in the game). Tended to go out of fashion pretty soon after WWII.

Griefbringer

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

There are actually only two classes that are really used for these, Class 4 and Class 5. One of the major differences being that one is a Flak/AA class, which allows it to op-fire at aircraft, while those classed as the other will not. I'm not sure if the restriction also exists for regular engagements. Also, the other class (used for Bow and Coax) has some other things in the code, that IIRC, prevents the weapon from being fired unless the vehicle is pointing at it when placed in the fourth slot (one of the reasons you'll sometimes see units with gaps or no weapons except in the fourth slot, especially turretless WWII tankettes).

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

note that some tanks had even the BMG fixed in one position, and fired by driver. For example IS-2, T-54/55.

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

Yea, but modern tanks have not :(, like the M1, it's one less MG for the enemy to worry about :D

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

I think that the main effect from such a fixed MG fired by a driver would be morale - chances of actually hitting anybody would not be too great. And it would distract the driver, who would probably be better off concentrating just on driving and letting the rest of the crew do shooting. BTW: didn't the early M3 Stuarts (WWII) have similar arrangement of two forward fixed MGs fired by the driver.

Another problem with BMG was probably that it made for a weaker spot in the front hull, that could be vulnerable to a lucky hit.

Griefbringer

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

There are BMGs and BMGs. The typical WW2 BMGs were on ball mounts used by the radio operator. Some limited aiming was possible but the mount was indeed a big weak spot in the glacis. The BMGs on the T-54 and the likes were a fixed affair.
It made for a very small weak spot but I imagine that suppressive fire was all that it was good for.

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

To be frank, suppressive fire was most of times all ball-mounted weapon was able to do. I recall reading somewhere that British tankers mostly liked more Browning .30 as BMG compared to BESA. Reason - BESA was too accurate, so was great at attacking specific targets but in "normal" BMG operation the notably larger dispersion of M1919 seemed to be more effective at suppressing unseen enemies.

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

BTW: not quite relevant for SPMBT, but for those interested in curious bow mounted weapons, check out the Finnish Vickers tanks from 1940. These had been ordered from UK unarmed, with the intention to mount in them domestically manufactured weapons. For reasons that are still a bit unclear to me, the weapon chosen for the hull mount was an SMG!

Griefbringer

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

AFAIK Finland was quite short of weapons so why not? BMG was anyway more a suppression weapon and it was important that it fires hail of bullets, no matter how accurately and most of times at relatively short ranges. So let's mount SMG and use HMG on field mount somewhere.
Btw SMGs were planned as main weapon of Czechoslovakian light fortifications in dense spots - where the neigboring pillboxes were just 50-150 meters apart, it was considered adequate replacement for LMG. Unfortunately just few tests were carried out before the Munich.
(And didn't some Italian tank use OVP twin SMG?)

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

No clue about that - I considered the infantry usage of the twin SMG with a gunshield funky enough (though also pretty clumsy).

Then again, a number of tanks of various origins also had pistol ports in the turret, pointing at various directions, for crew to discharge their personal arms at enemy getting too close for comfort.

Griefbringer

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

Maybe I can offer some clarity then. Visibility beyond a few hundred meters outside Lapland and Ostrobothnia would be a rarely seen luxury. The rest of the country is pretty much dense forest. water or urban areas. The bow SMG makes perfect sense to me given the terrain the tanks were likely to be used.

I had the luxury of having a laser range finder in my use during my conscript service and other than in the live firing ranges where the visibility has been deliberately increased by hacking down the forests, being able to measure further than 150 meters away was really rare.

- Koh

Re: BMGs, CMGs,AAMGs,TMGs,whateverMGs
 

Hey, I come from Helsinki, I know how the visibility is like here.

I am not really sure what the late 30's tank doctrine was, but I presumed that the attempt would have been on using them on somewhat open areas (eg. places with lots of fields) rather than in the middle of the forest - though in the 1941 offensive they were not sent into the relative open areas in Karelian Isthmus, but to the less open areas north of lake Ladoga.

Presumably the SMG was removable, so when the crew would dismount/bail out, they would have a handy weapon for close-range defense. Then again, the Red Army tankers were expected to bring the DT MG when bailing out of a tank, that would have provided them with a more firepower to keep enemy heads down when making a retreat.

Representing stuff like that in SPMBT or SPWWII would not really work, with only one possible crew set-up. And besides, it would lead game players to possible use their bailed out crews in an unnecessary aggressive fashion, rather than getting them back to the safety of the depot.

Griefbringer