Firearms Issues

Home › Forums › Historical › Bolt Action › Firearms Issues

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • February 24, 2025 at 4:15 am #190912
    L.T. Russell
    Participant

    I wrote a topic a while back about what I considered to be problems with how certain firearms are portrayed in Bolt Action.  It appears that no real corrections were made in Version 3, and now some weapons are more messed up than ever.  I’m wondering if anyone at Warlord Games has the slightest idea how firearms actually work….

    1) Why don’t pistols have “assault” anymore?  If there’s a firearm more useful in a close assault, I can’t think of it.  There’s a reason WWI stormtroop units carried pistols instead of bolt-action rifles.  Didn’t any of the folks at Warlord Games watch CROSS OF IRON?  Every time the platoon was in a close assault, Kruger pulled his P38 out from behind his belt and used it to good effect. I notice in Armies of Germany, the pistols have been taken from the Brandenberg troops.  Pistols are practically worthless now….

    2) In what world, does a military riotgun have the same effective range as an assault rifle?  An assault rifle has a practical range of around 250-300 yards.  A shotgun loaded with buckshot is barely effective at 50 yards.  Shotguns are devastating at short range, should probably have either an extra shot or two, or maybe deal an extra pin….

    3) An FG42, the cutting-edge fallschirmjaeger weapon, is an automatic rifle, not an assault rifle.  The FG42 fires a full-length rifle cartridge, just like a BAR, and has an integral bipod, just like a BAR.  Assault rifles use a reduced length rifle cartridge….

    4) The MG34 and 42, and the M1919A6 Browning are the only actual LMGs in WWII.  Pretty much every other country’s LMGs are not belt-fed and so are basically automatic rifles.  To try and rectify this difference be giving a German MG one more dice of firepower is cheap.  A belt-fed 34 or 42 had double and sometimes triple the rate-of-fire of pretty much every other magazine-fed “MG” in WWII….

    5) I get that a Browning M2 HMG is a serious piece of hardware, but now it’s some kinda wonder weapon.  Despite having a fairly slow rate-of-fire, it now puts out the same number of rounds, if not more, as a 34 or 42?  Ridiculous.  How does it put pins on medium tanks that it can’t even damage?  And now it has roughly the same effective range as a light autocannon?  IDK, no Ma Deuce I ever fired had a telescopic sight on it.  Sure the round will go thousands of yards, but the human eye can only see so far….

    6) I like the idea of US rifle units get an extra shot for every 3 riflemen.  It makes sense since the US was the only army almost totally equipped with semiautomatic rifles.  It seems ridiculous that the Brits can chose the same ability as an option.  I’ll be the first to admit Lee Enfields are solid rifles, but they’re still just bolt-action rifles, just like everyone else but the US used….

    Well, thanks for reading my rant if you do.  I welcome your comments….

    February 24, 2025 at 5:39 am #190914
    Kar98k
    Participant

    3) An FG42, the cutting-edge fallschirmjaeger weapon, is an automatic rifle, not an assault rifle. The FG42 fires a full-length rifle cartridge, just like a BAR, and has an integral bipod, just like a BAR.

    I couldn’t agree with you more. In fact, the FG42 was better than the BAR, but regarding Bolt Action (or any game), the FG42 and BAR should be in the same category. For those that don’t think so, read “Death from Above: The German FG42 Paratroop Rifle”  by Thomas Dugelby and Blake Stevens before giving an uneducated response. Or, even watch that Forgotten Weapons episode where they do a side by side of the FG42 and BAR. Spoiler Alert, FG42 comes out on top, but both do the same thing.

    5) I get that a Browning M2 HMG is a serious piece of hardware, but now it’s some kinda wonder weapon. Despite having a fairly slow rate-of-fire, it now puts out the same number of rounds, if not more, as a 34 or 42? Ridiculous. How does it put pins on medium tanks that it can’t even damage?

    Well, did you factor in the Hitler’s Buzzsaw rule? As for the medium tank, uhm, it does make one hell of a sound when hitting the armor of a medium tank. That should rattle the crew. Unless they are hardened veterans with ear protectors 😉

    6) I like the idea of US rifle units get an extra shot for every 3 riflemen. It makes sense since the US was the only army almost totally equipped with semiautomatic rifles. It seems ridiculous that the Brits can chose the same ability as an option. I’ll be the first to admit Lee Enfields are solid rifles, but they’re still just bolt-action rifles, just like everyone else but the US used….

    My guess this was a game balance tweak. (based from 1st and 2nd editions)

    As for 1) and 2), pistols are still overrated in the game. If given a choice these were last choice weapons (only up one from a knife) in action, but shotguns is just a game mechanic thing.

    February 25, 2025 at 8:42 am #190916
    Nat
    Participant

    The following two points are essential for understanding Bolt Action:
    1) Bolt Action isnt a historical simulation game – its a game of the film /comic of history – this is true of ALL Warlords games.
    2) All the stats are homogenised to give a feel rather than accuracy, and to make the game easier to play.

    Also.. .v3 is just tweaks of earlier editions… but lets see
    1) close combat was toned down across the board, and changes made to the total modifiers (and exceptions in the game) so yeah pistols lost everything movement & combatwise for game ‘balance’.
    2) Watch Hollywood films or read commando comics … yeah warlord comics as well (yes thats where the company got its name from…. a 1970s/80s comic)
    3) see above
    4) The term LMG has nothing to do with being belt fed… but rather the weapons role, how portable it is & the ammo it uses… the Lewis gun (ww1 drum magazine) was an LMG, the Bren was an LMG (sickel mag) …the DP27 (drum magazine) …etc etc …
    Its actually the medium machine gun that doesnt exist in real world terminology.. eg the British army called the Vickers a Heavy Machine Gun, from when they adopted the Lewis gun until the vickers was retired in the 50s… but for the game its an MMG.

    I think that the real separation is the crew /individual nature of the users… both the BAR and FG42 were used by individuals where as all other weapons listed as LMGs were crew operated.
    5) Its the same as the Russian 12.7mm Dshka… again its the hermoginisation of stats & gameplay … HMGs werent cost effective in game, couldnt be dropped in price because the knock on effect on MMGs so they got more shots!
    6) This is again comic book ‘knowledge’ that the British could shoot faster with bolt action rifles than other nations could with semi-automatic rifles.  But it actually goes back to pre-ww1 when the British infantry were trained in ‘the mad minute’ rapid fire technique …each infantryman averaging 25+ rounds hitting a man sized target at 300 yards in (shock) 1 minute!  In theory a rifle platoon could put out as many .303 rounds as the regiments Vickers machine gun section….however this ‘skill’ died out in the trenches, the ‘mad minute’ exercise has come come back in to military shooting competitions, still using a bolt action rifle and the record is about 40 hits on the target.

    • This reply was modified 1 month ago by Nat.
    • This reply was modified 1 month ago by Nat.
    • This reply was modified 1 month ago by Nat.
    March 4, 2025 at 4:22 pm #190942
    Peter
    Participant

    Bolt Action V3 is neither a historical nor a realistic game. With version 3, the decision has been made to publish a fantasy game set during the Second World War.
    It’s not just the weapon rules, which very often don’t make sense. It’s the rules in general. I could list countless ones.

    Why they decided to change the rules so much can only be answered by Warlord games themselves. For me it’s incomprehensible, because with V2 they had a very good foundation and could have developed the game further and made it more ”adult”. Instead, they went the other way.

    March 28, 2025 at 10:37 pm #191006
    L.T. Russell
    Participant

    Howdy Gents!  Sorry I didn’t get back to this for so long.  I will attempt to throw out some thoughtful comments….

    Howdy Kar98k!

    5) No, I didn’t overlook Hitler’s Buzzsaw, I just think it’s heavily watered down.  Besides being belt-fed vs magazine-fed, MG34/42s fired two to three TIMES faster the any other countries MGs.  I think one extra die is a rip-off.  I might buy into machinegun rounds rattling an inexperienced crew, but not regular or veteran tankers.  Have you heard of the armor concept of “scratching my back”?  You spray MY tank with YOUR MGs, to get these pesky “tank hunters” off.  It’s a real thing.  Nobody in combat wears ear plugs.  Heck, when I was in we never wore ’em anywhere except for qualification ranges.  I can only image how loud the inside of a WWII medium tank was during combat….

    6) I get the idea of game “balance”, BUT everyone’s stuff didn’t work the same.  I wanna see some sorta historical difference.  Otherwise we might as well just play with generic units; tank, medium 1 each, machinegun, heavy, w/crew, 1 each….

    I disagree about pistols.  In a war where most soldiers were carrying a 5-shot bolt action rifle, a semiautomatic pistol or a good solid revolver was something to have when involved in close-quarters battle, clearing trenches/bunkers, fighting house-to-house, prisoner escort, etc.  Why do you thing the FN Hi-power was so popular with fallschirmjaegers and waffen ss troops?  A semiauto handgun with a 14 round capacity!

    THANKS for your comments!

     

    March 28, 2025 at 11:38 pm #191007
    L.T. Russell
    Participant

    Howdy Nat!

    Some a this sounds familiar.  I think we’ve had some a this discussion before, back in Version 2 days….

    1) I disagree.  I think folks (like me) play Bolt Action BECAUSE it’s a WWII historical game.  That’s also why we play the different countries armies and buy the scenario books.  If I wanted to play comic books, I’d play Judge Dredd or Warhammer or Rogue Trooper or Marvel Crisis Protocol…

    2) I get playability vs detail; HOWEVER I don’t want any more homogenization than is absolutely necessary.  Otherwise why even bother having different countries armies.  Just play with generic units….

    Version 3

    1) I’m not totally sold on the new close combat rules.  I don’t see ruining pistols as “game balance”, I just see it as someone who doesn’t know squat about firearms wasn’t willing to put in the effort.

    2) Yeah, see above….

    3) Yeah, see above….

    4) The technical term LMG has everything to do with belt-feed.  It’s how you differentiate between an automatic rifle and a machinegun.  They both fire the same full-length rifle cartridge, they both have a bipod.   A “light” machinegun has a 2-man crew and is fired from the integral bipod.  A “medium” machinegun has a 3-man crew and is fired from a tripod, maybe with a traversing/elevation device.  Germans also called their MGs on a tripod a “heavy” machinegun.  I believe that just refers back to water-cooled, WWI technology/nomenclature.  The guns WERE “heavy”!  IIRC, some armies were trying to differentiate between water-cooled and air-cooled MGs.  And also, no one had coined the phrase for a “general-purpose” machinegun.  All these MGs are still firing a full-length rifle cartridge….

    5) ACTUAL “heavy” MGs, like the M2 or the  DShK fire a 12.7mm HEAVY machinegun round.  They’re one step below automatic cannons.  EVERYTHING about them is heavy, even the ammo, but their value is their PENETRATION, the power of their rounds , NOT the number they put out, ’cause HMGs tend to fire fairly slow….and their ability to potentially blast anything up to some a the earlier light tanks, halftracks and armored cars.  HMGs are hell-on-wheels against light stuff, soft-skins, etc.  I remember shooting a Jeep in half, when I was on an M2 crew in the USMC.  IMO, the new Version 3 HMGs; too many rounds, ridiculous range, putting pins on medium tanks is BS….

    6) What I recall reading about this “rapid” fire of Enfields was in WWI, firing at long range, at an area target (as opposed to point targets).  Basically using a lotta rifle fire as a substitute for machinegun fire.  I say this falls under the “cheaty” British concept.  Bolt-action rifles are NOT semiautomatic rifles.  Here they’re just ripping off the US, instead a the Germans for once.  What was the typical combat load for a soldier armed with a bolt-action rifle in WWII, was it 60 rounds?  Seems like an impractical idea to expend all your ammo in a minute….

    Thanks for your time and consideration!

     

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.