[Marek_Tucan]

Every commercial "simulation" is just a game. Even if you take a look at the very complex Il-2 Shurmovik series, which do stand on a firm basis of huge physical model and try to get as real as possible, it's still a game. Bombers still have Magic Otto rear gunners, and you can do all sorts of "unreal" things and maneuvers just because you know that you risk nothing but score (aonother slash at the reality). You can set MG convergence to any value you like, whereas in reality there were limits imposed by construction. Most of all, since it's a game, you seldom experience say smashing numerical superiority of the enemy while playing Germans. If your mission is to intercept bombers, most of times you'll get four bombers with four-craft escorts. Yet, it is a Simulation Game, often shortend to just Simulation. And very good at that simulating part.

And just a few final words to the sniper issue...
1) What was modus operandi of that real schooled snipers? Build a nest carefully, then wait for three days until the correct targets presents itself, then one shot and get out of there? You might notice this is not the thing Sniper units in SPWW2 do. Snipers in SPWW2 serve in direct support of other tactical units, in an intense firefight and the likes. Today, ths function is called "Marksman", back then, there was no such distinction (anway, such distinction exist only on the West, after all Dragunov SVD is by its function and distribution due to today's terminology marksman rifle intended for platoon's marksmen, but the"S" stands for "Snaiperskaya"). Most of times warning cry "Sniper" arose, the enemy was just sitting somewhere with his ordinary Mauser even without optical scope and firing at relatively close range, just accurately and unexpectedly.

2) I repeat, what did USMC Sniper School use in 1942 if there were no Sniper sifles? Mounting the scope isn't THAT hard. Russians used PTRD and PTRS anti-tank rifles withs scopes, USMC sniper in Vietnam did use scoped M2HB. Hunters all over the world used scopes mounted on various rifles, and in the US the hunter culture was quite strong (and still is), did all of the hunters becoming soldiers suddenly forget how to mount a scope and how to use it? In USSR they didn't so I find it hard to believe they did in US.
The largest problem Russians had with creating sniper variant of Mosin was shape of charging handle, it had to be changed from straight to bent in order not to interfere with the scope - Kar98k, SMLE and M1903 all had charging handles bent downward from the get go. After all that's reason scoped SVT-40 was used so much in the Red Army, it was able to mount scope unhindered compared to stadard Mosin. The argument that "US had lack of rifles, therefore there can be no snipers" is misguiding, Germans and Russians both also had lack of rifles - that's why Germans had to issue trophy weapons to whole formations and why Russians (esp. in the beginning) sent to combat units where unarmed soldiers were expected to get weapon from fallen comrades. But it didn't stop them from having snipers(called so, mostly acting as marksmen - just like Sniper units in SPWW2). Just as the Russians weren't stopped by fact that sniper Mosin variant began production in 1941. And as Brit-weapons-armed units weren't stopped by the fact special sniper variant of SMLE appeared just during the war.

So... I don't view the absence/presence of unit called "Sniper" and performing marksman's duties in US OOB as such a dire insult to reality. Definitely not compared to say Maus.


Btw. Mauser Kar98k sniper variant was produced since 1941, I guess Germany shouldn't have snipers prior this date as well... Unless it was, as in every other army, so that the use of scoped rifles and calls for making one that would be specialised for scope mounting was widespread enough to get noticed by high command and procurement.You need snipers first to get demands for sniper rifles.