18 replies to this topic

[BlueWeasel]

I think that's the only fig the US don't have that the Kroids do.

Maybe it's just cause the US does just fine with Sgts running the show, but it'd be nice to have some Brass.

I'm looking forward to stocking up on RotD whilst at RC.

[cutebutpsycho]

I interpreted the guy with the Tommy gun as an officer, although I don't know what he's officially labeled as, because Thompsons were primarily issued to officers during WW2, and I know Reaper takes historical accuracy VERY seriously when it comes to their Nazi zombie games :)

[Qwyksilver]

The figure holding the Tommy Gun is the Sgt.

[Lars Porsenna]

IIRC officers would have carbines or pistols (sometimes both!)

The M1 SMG was primarily issued to squad leaders, as a means of providing close in automatic firepower for the squad, though other units (tank crews early on FREX) might get them, and there was plenty of "creative aquisition that went on.

Damon.

[Don Rodolfo Graziani]

American officers in Italy learned to trade off their carbine for a standard issue rifle (and ditch their sidearms) as fast as they could since German snipers targeted anyone carrying those weapons. It just took a while to figure out how those snipers were singling out officers soooo effectively.

DRG

[haldir]

American officers in Italy learned to trade off their carbine for a standard issue rifle (and ditch their sidearms) as fast as they could since German snipers targeted anyone carrying those weapons.

DRG

reminds me of Gary Sinse's character Lt. Dan in Forest Gump, when Gump & Bubba first salute him

[mercoutlaw]

Thompson's were primarily issued to officers, especially those in the French theatre and in larger quantities within the Ranger battallions. Most squad level automatic fire power was provided by the BAR's carried by one member of each squad, much like modern rifle teams have a SAW gunner. Any model with a Thompson, not wearing chevrons could easily be used as an officer, the ranks would be easy to painted on or if you are really ambitious...green stuff sculpt.

[Lars Porsenna]

Thompson's were primarily issued to officers,

Reference?

According to this it doesn't indicate the M1 was issues primarily to officers.

Damon.

[mercoutlaw]

Thompson's were primarily issued to officers,

Reference?

According to this it doesn't indicate the M1 was issues primarily to officers.

Damon.

First off, Wikipedia is not 'fact checked' nor is it an academic site. Anyone can post on there, and make corrections. I take my info directly from the source, men who served in the United State Army during WWII. My grandfather (rest his soul) was a member of the 4th ID, served during the Normandy invasion, through the Ardennes offensive, and fought his way all they way into Germany. He, and other veterans I have spoken with have told me that when the Army first began to issue the Thompson they were limited, and due to short size and versatility they were given PRIMARILY, not EXCLUSIVELY to officers when they were first distributed, mainly because they got first dibs. Of course, others had them, NCO's, some through the loss of its previous owners, and Marines in the island offensives were issued them in greater numbers as were scout units, due to their small size and rapid fire ability. They were an ideal CQB and seige weapon for fast moving light infantry over rough terrain. When the Army first ordered the Thompson they only ordere about 20,000 in 1940, in 41 another 300,000 plus. Even more than 300,000 weapons would be a ratio of nearly 135:1 for weapon distribution...roughly 1 per company if evenly distributed. The main infantry rapid fire came in the form of a BAR or a .30 cal machine gun. Take it or leave it, my minor was in Military history, I have studied WWII for more than 18 years in scrutinizing detail, it is a hobby and a passion.

[Doug Sundseth]

It's also my understanding that the M-3 SMG ("Grease Gun") was a much more commonly issued item during WWII than the M-1 (Thompson).

The Thompson was quite expensive (IIRC, around $2000 in 194x dollars), while the M-3 was much simpler (and thus cheaper) to make, though nowhere near as nice. The scarcity of the Tommy Gun made it even more likely that the few available would be monopolized by officers.

[Lars Porsenna]

Mercoutlaw, I also have a history background too (I have a BA in history) and also have studied WWII in excruciating detail as well. But I'm not interested in playing that game.

Edit: here is another reference: http://www.bayonetst...rifle_squad.htm

To whit: "It was not surprising then that he [the squad leader] was the first man to receive the new generation of submachine guns which appeared during World War Two. By rearming the Squad Leader with a short-range weapon, it helped divert him from the lure of the longer range fire fight. Also, it increased the firepower of the Squad in the close quarter battle, and put the weapon into the hands of the man tasked with leading it. "

Yet another reference: http://orbat.com/sit...sa/plattoe.html (scroll down)

Now to support the previous poster a bit: http://www.bayonetst...fle_platoon.htm mentioned officers sometimes got SMGs, but also primarily used carbines.

2 more things and then I think I'm done:

Re: inteviewing veterans. My question is HOW many veterans were interviewed, and does that constitute a statistically significant amount? The problem with recollections is that memory is not perfect; the police have ths issue whenever they interview eye-witnesses. It becomes even more problematic some 50 or 60 years after the fact. If it was just one individual, then as my history prof used to say "anecdote is not singular for evidence."

Lastly, re: the 135:1 ratio. What methodology is used here? throwing out ratios without details on methodology is problematic, in that I have NO IDEA how how derived that figure. Just divide total production by total personnel in the Army (not particularly rigorous IMHO)? What would be a better methodology is to estimate the number of infantry combat troops during a given time period (there were approx 230 infantry regiments at the theoretical peak of US Army combat strength, of which some were Airborne regiments, and some were armored infantry regiments; this is derived from the fact there were approx 98 divisions active in the army in WWII, with 3 infantry regiments per infantry division, less per Armored divisions). What sort of conclusion do we come to then?

Damon.

[Lars Porsenna]

The Thompson was quite expensive (IIRC, around $2000 in 194x dollars), while the M-3 was much simpler (and thus cheaper) to make, though nowhere near as nice. The scarcity of the Tommy Gun made it even more likely that the few available would be monopolized by officers.

Yeah, but WHEN was the M3 first issued? This is an important question when making the analysis.

Damon.

[Doug Sundseth]

Yeah, but WHEN was the M3 first issued? This is an important question when making the analysis.

Damon.

Per the referenced site, 1942. The vast majority of US troops were equipped after 1941.

[sethohman]

All this historical argument is nice and informative and all, but you have to remember this point. When the US encounters German zombies, I am sure they will modify their equipment loads. I for one would much rather have a SMG than a pistol or carbine against zombies.

Secrets of the Third Reich takes it a step further, advances the timeline to 1949, and gives all the US officers assault rifles.

And, any equipment load out in ROTD has to be balanced for game play, anyways. And their really would be no effective difference between the M-3 and a Thompson, IMO, on a ROTD game board. Both are .45 cal, similar RoF (600 RPM for the Thompson, 450 for the grease gun), and 100-150 meter effective range.

[SaintRigger]

Just to add a little fuel on the fire - here is a picture of my g'pa from WWII