If you had to pick a World War Two weapon to fight with?(Infantry)

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[[AB]RikiRude]

Can you please provide the reason why you would use the sten? It was probably one of the worst mass used guns of WWII.

They were made of cheap stamped metal, tended to jam due to the side mounted magazine, horribly inaccurate, and the side mounted magazine would get in the way.

Don't be fooled into thinking the Sten was utter crap, otherwise they would have kept using the Thomson or designed another easy to manufacture SMG.

The Stens I have held and reviewed where actually sturdy although very rough. The Germans produced the MP3008 which was basicaly a Sten with a different magazine mount configuration. The band wagon that Stens where just utter shite is just not ture, if it did break and fire when dropped as much as people make out then it would have been replaced.

Why replace it when it was so cheap and easy to manufacture. Now I don't know the specific numbers, but do you have any idea how many stens you could produce for the price of a thompson? OK, so I tried googling it to find an answer, but couldn't find the cost of a sten, but a thompson was $225 to produce, while I'm guessing a sten was in the range of $25-50. Also the sten had only 47 parts so it was easy to get replacement parts and such. I mean the gun wasn't complete crap, but I think there were just so many other great choices out there.

The US's answer to a cheap SMG was the M3 Grease Gun, which I don't really know too much about.

[They Call Me SpitFire]

m3 Grease Gun is WAY better than COH makes it, I know the Airbourne used it extensivly it was a cheap reliably gun, and accurate too, just not to much power behind it.

[[AB]RikiRude]

it's not the fact that CoH makes it bad, it's the fact that the only unit that gets it is the weakest unit on the allied side. I bet if you could upgrade rifles with M3s like volks with MP40s, they would commend some respect!

[They Call Me SpitFire]

Engineers are about as good as normal riflemen, they just had engineer training.

[Apex]

It's called Sturmgewehr and Mosin Nagant 

[They Call Me SpitFire]

thnkxs apex I'm not the best speller when it comes to words I've never seen before.

[Willshire]

Can you please provide the reason why you would use the sten? It was probably one of the worst mass used guns of WWII.

They were made of cheap stamped metal, tended to jam due to the side mounted magazine, horribly inaccurate, and the side mounted magazine would get in the way.

Don't be fooled into thinking the Sten was utter crap, otherwise they would have kept using the Thomson or designed another easy to manufacture SMG.

The Stens I have held and reviewed where actually sturdy although very rough. The Germans produced the MP3008 which was basicaly a Sten with a different magazine mount configuration. The band wagon that Stens where just utter shite is just not ture, if it did break and fire when dropped as much as people make out then it would have been replaced.

Why replace it when it was so cheap and easy to manufacture. Now I don't know the specific numbers, but do you have any idea how many stens you could produce for the price of a thompson? OK, so I tried googling it to find an answer, but couldn't find the cost of a sten, but a thompson was $225 to produce, while I'm guessing a sten was in the range of $25-50. Also the sten had only 47 parts so it was easy to get replacement parts and such. I mean the gun wasn't complete crap, but I think there were just so many other great choices out there.

The US's answer to a cheap SMG was the M3 Grease Gun, which I don't really know too much about.

Sten was like $7. It is the just cheapest piece of stamped sheet metal the Brits could find.

[[AB]RikiRude]

Thanks Willshire, well that explains it for every thompson you could have 32 stens. and in world war two it was about quantity not quality in most cases. though I do think the french take the cake with bad small arms with the Chauchat a light machine gun which had a hole in the side of the magazine so you could at any moment count how many rounds you had left, although it also let dirt and mud into the gun which often caused jams and such.

Oh and most importantly, you are forgetting, the liberator, THE most OP weapon of WWII =D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator

"An interesting fact about the Liberator is that the factories could produce one faster than the weapon could be loaded and fired. The factory turned out a pistol every six or seven seconds whilst loading took about 10 seconds." - wiki

[PrydainAllies]

Either way, the Sten was a good weapon for its production cost. If I had a choice between the three major SMGs of the war I would choose the Thompson first, Sten second and MP40 last. The British also used the drum magazine Thompson in North Africa but it was too unreliable and was replaced by Stens and 30/20 round magazine Thompsons. The Sten was rugged and its spring was so open it could clog up more than an AK and still fire.

And I take your Liberator and raise you a Welrod. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welrod

[StuartAxis]

Kar98 is very accurate, and very reliable. German engineering, despite being a 30 year-old design. In my opinion, one of the most-ahead of it's time weapons when made.

If the Gwhr 43 were on there, I'd rather take that. Semi auto is more fun, and better in trenches, buildings & other close combat scenes. (Especially when facing SMG rangers).

And in COH, the Gwhr 43 makes a loud SNAP when firing (the sniper has one, so do the PE soldiers, when upgraded).

[[AB]RikiRude]

Well if you are having an SMG comp between the sten, MP40, and thompson, you ought to even the grounds a bit, and replace the thompson with the M3, that way you are choosing 3 cheap to produce guns. and heck yeah, im not sure what $7 is back then, but a decent gun that you can produce at probably under $100 a pop in todays money is one heck of a deal.

And out of the 3 stamp metal SMGs, id go with the grease gun, because it's got a slower rate of fire, so it was a bit more accurate, plus it fired a larger round i believe.

Dang it, you win, I can't find any strange or rare small arms off the top of my head, but I do raise you the gyro rocket pistol

http://www.poetv.com/video.php?vid=27895

[IrisDane]

wow luv it

[Willshire]

PPSh-41 is the best SMG in WW2, IMHO.

[IrisDane]

did it even have a muzzle climb?Man that gun was amzing

[Thtb]

I woud pick the NUCLEAR RR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khyZI3RK2lE

Thats a epic gun!

Also; Various axis guns;
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wqHzZKcyRqw

*fixed

[[AB]RikiRude]

thtb, all your links are the gyro rocket gun.