Page 1 of 2

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:12 pm
by Rich H
This always causes wargamers problems...
I'd be inclined to use it as BAR for simplicity as it was a heavy lump and mag fed.

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:24 pm
by OldNick
This has been discussed a few times before, usually with the same conclusions being reached. A quick search on fg42 gives links to the previous discussions.

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2020 7:22 pm
by Truscott Trotter
I believe one of the previous posters said they were meant to be issued at 1-2 per section. (To replace an MG42 IIRC.)
As for cost yes you need to add on the values for an auto rifle in the Coculator and see if it makes a difference

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:54 pm
by Neil Todd
From memory the last discussion I saw Rich classified them as assault rifles. I personally think the BAR is a better fit and as mentioned above it/they replace the MG42 in the section. You are also looking at very late 43 onwards for use. Still they are a nice looking weapon that will add some great flavour to your force.

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:14 pm
by Truscott Trotter

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2020 3:32 pm
by Will3T
For the Carentan campaign I wrote they were a Level 1 Support Option, giving one FG42 to a Gruppe that replaces a rifleman. Counts as an Assault Rifle. I was never certain as to how these weapons were assigned so decided to leave it up to the player to form their own ad-hoc force.

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:42 pm
by NTM
I think it was down tobthe unit as to how they were allocated. Von der Heydte concentrated his in the recce platoon.

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2020 3:48 pm
by andysyk
In FJR 6 when issued they were purloined by all the old hands so ended up in the support mortar and mg zugs. Where most old lags in infantry units end up. Plenty of photos of them in Rome leaning against walls whilst their owners fire mortars. So not put to much use. By Normandy as mentioned above Heydte policed them up and gave them to people with actual use for them. The FJ in use never dreamed of replacing an MG34 or 42 with one they were seen as a MP substitute or addition whatever the designers point. Interestingly FJ 6 got its first MG 42s by capturing them from the Italians. They also had 12 man squads with 2 MG until the end of the war . If thre manpower was available. Defo more a BAR than MP44

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2020 8:44 am
by Seret
andysyk wrote:
Sun Apr 26, 2020 3:48 pm
Defo more a BAR than MP44
Previously I would have said so too, but now I actually think classing it an assault rifle works well. Consider these two videos:
FG-42 vs M1 Garand 2-gun

(cont...)

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2020 8:45 am
by Seret
FG-42 vs BAR 2-gun

In this kind of dynamic "run and gun" shooting the FG-42 proves to be very handy, outshooting the BAR and even the smaller M1 Garand. It was a modern, versatile weapon easily handled by one man; rapid, pointy and controllable. The in line design makes felt recoil and muzzle climb negligible. I think classing it as an assault rifle in CoC is perfectly reasonable if it can outperform a semi-auto like the Garand at rapidly engaging point targets. It was a very modern controllable design, some of it's design features being directly copied by the assault rifles that followed it like the AR-15.

Food for thought anyway. I don't think it makes a big difference either way, and it was clearly a hybrid design that doesn't slot nicely into most of the established classes of weapon.