The Pacific War 2: U.S. Marine Corps Infantry Weapons

[[130.Pz]W.Fuchs]

StG44 at Gazala.

[Captain Pyjama Shark]

And essentially every other battle.

[[130.Pz]W.Fuchs]

Thats IMO the most funniest battle with a StG44.
The StG44 shouldn't even being ingame. It's BF 1942..
But I forgive them for their ignorance.

[Archimonde0_0]

You can pick fun at them all you want but it was never about being historically accurate in the Vanilla game, it was about being balanced and fair for all sides. And what better way to achieve this than use the same weapons for each army no matter the nationality.

Besides, they were planning on releasing far more diverse set of weapons but scrapped the project when BFV Development was undertaken at DICE because EA demanded it.

[Sir Apple]

Originally Posted by Captain Pyjama Shark

I think that he meant the rifle. And wasn't the Johnson on Ortona as well?

Yea, the rifle.

Out of the few times I've been able to handle one in real life, I must say its an amazing rifle. Far better balanced then the Garand. It also is just such a comfortable rifle... even more so then a K31.

So yea, if FH2 team doesn't include this rifle in the Pacific theater, I'm going to sue the mustache off of Lobo.

[[130.Pz]W.Fuchs]

Originally Posted by Archimonde0_0

You can pick fun at them all you want but it was never about being historically accurate in the Vanilla game, it was about being balanced and fair for all sides. And what better way to achieve this than use the same weapons for each army no matter the nationality.

Besides, they were planning on releasing far more diverse set of weapons but scrapped the project when BFV Development was undertaken at DICE because EA demanded it.

Balancing could have been done different. They have not done it efficient.

[Alakazou]

Originally Posted by [WDW]Megaraptor

Does anyone have any more info on the use of the Boys Rifle by the USMC? I can't find much.

I got the information from USMC Combat Infantry Equipement of World War II by Alec S.Tulkoff

[Johannes]

Originally Posted by Archimonde0_0

You can pick fun at them all you want but it was never about being historically accurate in the Vanilla game, it was about being balanced and fair for all sides. And what better way to achieve this than use the same weapons for each army no matter the nationality.

Besides, they were planning on releasing far more diverse set of weapons but scrapped the project when BFV Development was undertaken at DICE because EA demanded it.

Agreed (though I would have personally integrated a form of balancing that made use of historical accuracy; this is another subject). Battlefield 1942 was never (stated in interviews) about historical accuracy, which is why I don't tend to poke fun at it when I point out the errors (as opposed to the way I trash Treyarch's efforts since, though they are more accurate than BF1942, all they do is constantly advertise and gloat about their attention to historical accuracy). But I never knew this about the diverse set of weapons thing. Do you have a link to an interview or something where they state these plans? I would love to see when they said so.

Originally Posted by Captain Pyjama Shark

Ok, i shall rephrase. It shows a Thompson as their main submachine gun, as opposed to the Sten.

Which is not really much of an error since the Sten didn't surpass the M1928 Thompson (though the model in the game is the M1... but so it was in Infinity Ward's Call of Duty 2, I think, as well) in widespread British service until the Normandy campaign, while BF1942 only portrayed the British in North Africa (and the Battle of Britain, at which time the Sten wasn't yet in service). At most, you would have had a couple of Stens in use in the Tunisian campaign, which isn't portrayed by BF1942, and where I wouldn't doubt the possibility that the French, to whom many Stens were issued in emergency due to the complete lack of submachine guns in the French Army, might have used them more than the British.

Battlefield 1942: The Road to Rome gave both the French and the British the Sten, which is actually somewhat of an error, since both armies fighting in the Italian campaign used the Thompson guns more. I don't even think the Sten was standard issue to the British Eighth Army in that campaign, while whatever Stens were in French service were most likely phased completely out of service in favor of Thompsons since by then Lend-Lease had kicked in for them. Battlefield 1942: Secret Weapons gave the British commandos the silenced Sten.

Now then, to the original posts:

Good stuff!

I think we all know the M1 Garand was actually reloadable mid-clip (using a completely new clip; possible to top it off, but not likely done), but that it just wasn't done that often. Concerning the Springfield Unertl sniper, I've read that the Marines used the inferior Springfield M1903A4 alongside the Unertl sniper as well, not that they outright declined to issue it. That seems to be the claim of US M1903-A4 & USMC M1903-A1/Unertl and of USMC MODEL 1941 SNIPER RIFLE I don't know enough about the subject to be able to say for myself.

Also, any information as to the dates the Unertl and the M1903A4 sniper rifles entered service? Neither were around at the time of the United States' entry of the war, and I'm not sure which came first. That Olive Drab site says the Unertl entered service in November 1943 and that the M1903A4 was developed in 1942, but I'm not sure of the veracity of these claims.

I assume initially the Marines used more of the original M1918 BAR than the A1 and A2? Also, I know the British used some BAR 1918's (like in the Home Guard?), but I'm not sure where or how many...

Finally, this one has been eating away at me: What are the differences between the M1 and the M1A1 Bazooka, and when did the M1A1 enter service relative to the M1? During Operation Torch and for the beginning of the Tunisian campaign, wasn't the M1 the only version of the bazooka to exist?

Now for games! In Call of Duty: World at War, the Marines get the M1 Garand (bayonet and non-bayonet), the M1 Carbine (and I think the M2 is an upgrade in multiplayer), the M1928A1 Thompson, the BAR 1918 (dunno the variant), the Springfield Unertl sniper rifle (and unscoped in multiplayer), the Colt M1911(A1?), the .38 revolver (multiplayer only I think), Mk II nades, some smoke grenade, M2 flamethrower, the Browning M1919 and the M9 Bazooka. Pretty typical.

Medal of Honor Pacific Assault had the Springfield 1903 (unscoped and Unertl I think), the M1 Garand (with bayonet), the M1 Carbine, the M1928A1 Thompson, the M55 Reising (yay!), the BAR 1918, the Colt M1911A1, the M1917 revolver, Mk II nades (painted yellow I think), and I don't remember if any heavy/medium machine guns were used, except I remember the Lewis gun being in there. Other than the M55 Reising, the game's arsenal for the Marines was rather uninspiring.

No Johnson rifles or LMGs, except BF1942 which, as has been pointed out, weirdly gave the Johnson M1941 LMG to the Canadians at Caen.

[Ts4EVER]

Actually, there is a Johnson lmg in pacific assault. In one of the Night levels where you defend that ridge, an american bot carries it. He is invincible, so you can`t take it for yourself.

[Johannes]

Originally Posted by Ts4EVER

Actually, there is a Johnson lmg in pacific assault. In one of the Night levels where you defend that ridge, an american bot carries it. He is invincible, so you can`t take it for yourself.

You are right! I just remembered that and was coming back to edit the post, but no need for that now.

Actually, you can use the Johnson LMG in the game... at least you can in the Director's Edition. I'm not sure, but I remember reading about some differences between it and the normal edition of the game, and that that might have been one of them (though patch 1.2 might have changed that?).