And another one mentioned in the video above:
Move the damn Ross rifle, Enfield rifle, Piat, Sten and Lanchester and Bren from Normandy to Tunisia and give the damn US its god damn
1903A3 replacing the Ross rifle Ross was replaced in WW1 because it sucked and shoulded be ingame anyway as it was replaced in 1915
M1A1 Carbine (M1 Carbine but less controllable perfect for replacing the Lee Enfield not OP as the stock was terrible
M1 Thompson with 20 rd mags replacing the Sten and the M1A1 going to the Lanchesters spot on campaign
1928 Thompson with 50 rd drums going to lvl 29
Bazooka replaced Piat with Panzerfaust replacing Sturmpistole.
Bren Replaced by moving all the BARs down a campaign slot and giving the US the M1919A6 with a single 100 round belt. to compete with the MG-42 with several assault drums.
Then Commonwealth can have all the early war crap thats cluttering the US armories in Normandy.
1 Like
Well, there’s also the Howell Automatic Rifle, as far as semi-autos are concerned, which I included as a “maybe premium” on the list for the reason it wasn’t adopted, but Howell converted several Enfields to give to the Home Guard and tried (unsuccessfully) again to convince the UK to adopt his rifle. (after his failed attempt to convince them in WW1.) But only a few dozen were converted in this manner. To my knowledge, those are the only semi-automatic rifles the UK used during WW2.
But yeah, basically you have the options of commonwealth weapons that never saw service in Tunesia, commonwealth weapons that were limited production prototypes that the UK refused to adopt on scale, or no commonwealth semi-autos at all.
I’m fairly certain we’ll be getting the Bazooka and Panzerfaust as higher level AT weapons in higher ranks in Normandy as-is, and there’s no reason to remove weapons from the Normandy campaign. Especially given, quite honestly, Normandy should have had more of a mix of US and commonwealth weapons from the beginning, even if it’s ended up US only, given the US weren’t exactly the only ones who landed on the beaches at Normandy.
Secondly, the PIAT was developed too late to see service in North Africa, to my knowledge.
As for the Ross Rifle, it was in use in WW2 in Canadian Navy, coastal defense, as well as the UK home guard, and a few other groups at the time.
I don’t really see commonwealth weapons in Normandy as being a bad thing, personally.
Yea there is a great reason Germany didnt use half the Italian stuff US didnt use ANY of the British stuff and there all out of date perfect for Tunisia not good for Normandy.
Its all crap filler for countries that didnt use it.
Im not saying the US were the only ones what im saying is the US are whats represented in Normandy like the Commonwealth are gonna be in Tunisia despite the fact US being in africa in more numbers then the Commonwealth in Normandy.
Every UK weapon is inferior to the US counterpart that was left out. And im sure the same goes for Germany.
Look it sucks having to wait for Tunsia when theres already 2 eastern front campaigns but bogging the US down with crappy weapons is not a good solution.
And theres plenty of US options for AT if the M1A1 or M9 are to OP for low levels then the M1 bazooka with original rockets can be put in early with other variants added aswell. But the PIAT is crap. Horrible trajectory making what would be a kill shot with a bazooka bounce off at an awkward angle.
Same with the Axis 3 versions of the Panzerfaust and the Panzershreck and they put in a early war Sturmpistole that wasnt even present at normandy because they were all used up in Africa and the eastern front.
Also closed Beta had only US and German equipment so i hope this goes back to normal soon as that says this bs is only temporary but man is it taking awhile.
The thing is, if not in Normandy, there’s really no place for the PIAT, except /maybe/ a 1943 Italian campaign. Even still, it was used more often in the Normandy Campaign. Once again, Normandy also was not just the US, either.
Regardless, Normandy should be multiple allied factions, IMO, not just the US, even if that’s what is currently represented. With that said, that discussion is off the main discussion topic here. As such, coming back on topic, any further ideas for inclusion of weapons for the Tunesia campaign?
1 Like
Added an edit for the M1 Garand equipped with the M8 Grenade launcher and M9 HEAT grenades. With 50-55mm of penetration, they’re a bit better than the Itallian 20mm anti-tank rifle, but they’re also shorter range. Then again, they’d also come with a Garand. That said, they were at least actually used by Allied troops, unlike the Solothurn S-18/1000 which only went under evaluation trials with allied forces, so it’s a better fit for an anti-tank weapon slot. Thoughts?
What the fuck is that SCP of a rifle
The semi-automatic rifle that almost became the standard issue of the UK if WW1 had lasted just 6 more months?
read the links and watch the 2 videos - a complicated gas mechanism but the guy reckons it is an absolute delight to shoot. 
100,000 of them ordered in the last year of the war apparently - but the war ended and the order was cancelled and no more than a few dozen ever made.
A standard issue - but 100,000 was never going to replace the SMLE. But still - might have lead to an interesting 1920’s and 30’s for hte UK army if they had been bought.
Well yes, but that’s going down a very long alt-hist rabbit hole. Still, had the 100k been produced, it would have remained in service in the interwar period, which would have meant that with production ramping up for WW2, it likely would have served in a frontline role, etc, etc, etc. A lot of whatif involved, but it still would have changed things had it had enough time to actually enter mass production.
Or it might have ben tossed out of service immediately, or sent off to Iraq and the NW frontier and found indeispensible and with the downsized army adopted as an infantry standard,…
But it was certainly much more expensive than an SMLE - be interesting to compare its price to a Lewis Gun.
If kept they might have devised a better magazine feed for it!
1 Like
Yes i understand it wasnt just US in normandy. The problem is they never fought in the same skirmishes or engagements on a small scale.
If they want Commonwealth in normandy give them there own tree and seperate them. US and Commonwealth didnt use eachothers equipment period. Intermixing equipment is stupid and a very cheap ahistorical lazy way out.
No Commonwealth Soldiers vehicles = no commonwealth in this campaign that should extend to there weapons.
Piat is a piece of dog crap theres 3 versions of the God damn bazooka thats left out because the Piat.
Trajectory of a catapult and the Shells hit at such an angle they hardly ever penetrate anyeway. just glance off doing nothing.
Yet it has double the penetration of early bazookas, so I’m pretty sure it’s less of hell than it would be if you had an earlier bazooka. I’d certainly take a PIAT over an early bazooka for my bombers, and don’t particularly have issue using it in game. Yes, you need to learn how to aim the thing, but it’s honestly rather effective once you do learn the arc of it. Yes, an M1A1 or M9 bazooka with M6A3 rockets would be more effective, as they have the same penetration and a flat arc with less travel time. But I already struggle with penning Panzer 3’s at any amount of an off-angle, I don’t need even more difficulty in doing so.
Doesnt matter when it hits at such an awkward angle it doesnt penetrate. you can have 500mm of pen but if its accuracy is low and it always glances off due to horrible angles its useless.
BTW no current axis vehicle has anything over 80mm of flat armor anyway. M1 from 1942 would kill them let alone the M1A1 from 43 or the M9 from 44.
It’s really not useless. I reliably get kills with the Piat at up to 50-60 meters away. And the M1 bazooka with M6A1 rockets and 60mm of pen would just be painful to use in comparison, in my opinion.
But I get the feeling we’ll never come to an agreement on this point, so again, I would suggest we agree to disagree, and discuss the topic at hand, e.g. Tunesia.
Dude i just hit a puma in the side 3 times on the flat armor and it drove away things fucking useless. Id rather have shaped charge AT grenades. one of the only 3 commonwealth pieces of equipment the US used.
Like I said. Let’s agree to disagree, and get back on the thread topic, otherwise drop the discussion. Please.
Yea Hey one cool weapon Commonwealth could get is the 1921 commando with a big drum also the Webleys pretty cool revolver.