FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

Rich H
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 7:18 am
Location: Preston UK

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Post 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.

OldNick
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 9:59 am
Location: Coventry UK

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Post 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.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7577
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Post 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
Last edited by Truscott Trotter on Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Neil Todd
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 11:59 pm

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Post 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.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7577
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Post by Truscott Trotter »


Will3T
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 2:54 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Post 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.

NTM
Posts: 388
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 11:17 am

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Post by NTM »

I think it was down tobthe unit as to how they were allocated. Von der Heydte concentrated his in the recce platoon.

andysyk
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:11 pm

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Post 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

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4106
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Post 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...)
Last edited by Seret on Mon Apr 27, 2020 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4106
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: FG42 on FSJ platoons?

Post 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.

Post Reply