M1 Garand and Carbine stats query

[Troll66]

Hi

I seem to be at odds with the stat lines for the US weapons: M1 carbine (Rg 18" 2d6) and the M1 Garand Rifle (Rg 24" 1d6 Auto)
My feeling is that both weapons should be
:

M1 Carbine Rg 18" 2d6
M1 Garand Rg 24" 2d6 (drop the auto)

Rationale: both weapons were semi automatic that was the main advantage of the weapons; effective range seperated them (also carbine had less hitting power but that cannot be modelled in WaW).

I would welcome any thoughts on this
cheers

 

[SgtHulka]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the design philosophy was to model "types" of weapons instead of individual weapons. In other words, instead of modeling the difference between an MP40 and Ppsh, they treat them both as "Submachineguns" and therefore have identical statistics.

I also remember reading somewhere that the design decision was made to treat the carbine as an "assault rifle" since, apparently, that's how it was used by troops. So I'd have to look at the stats but I *think* the carbine was basically just given the same stats as the Stg44. Shorter range, higher rate of fire.

The Garand, on the other hand, was treated more like a rifle, so the stats are basically the same as the Kar98. However, in a nod to its semi-auto capability, they gave it the auto feature.

Personally, I thought the latter treatment of the Garand was a really elegant solution. I think it burns through its clip too quickly to justify 2d6. I'm less keen on the Carbine stats, but I know very little about that weapon, so I'm willing to roll with it.

 

[SgtHulka]

...I think the designers got it right. The M1 Garand is slightly better than a typical rifle (gaining the auto trait). The M1 Carbine is slightly worse than a "typical" assault rifle (losing the auto trait). And the BAR is its own, unique, beast, better on the move than a typical squad assault weapon but worse when prone.

As far as applying real-world logic to the stats, I'd stick by my contention that the M1 Garand's clip wasn't big enough to justify 2d6. The carbine, apparently, could accept a 30-round clip, plenty to justify 2d6. But it's semi-automatic, so it *should* be slightly worse than the StG-44.

Like you I was a bit thrown at first by the idea that the carbine was an "upgrade" option to the Garand. But I've been convinced.

 

[Troll66]

thanks for your feedback

 

[Agis]

SgtHulka: You summed it all up better then I could do! Thanks! 8)

 

[Troll66]

ok thanks for replies - I will go BTB.

 

[tonyngc]

30 round magazines for the M1 or M2 carbine were not common in WWII. The M2 and it's 30 round magazine didn't see service until early 1945. They pretty much had just the 15 round magazine. And at 100 yards the .30 carbine round had more muzzle energy than a .357 magnum does coming out of the muzzle of a pistol. But the FMJ round would over penetrate and not dump it's energy into the target. But it is very accurate.