I don’t know how things are in Tunisia, but in Normandy the M1 carbine is a transitional weapon between the starter rifles and the Garand/M2 that open later.
Axis in Normandy has the useless Mas and Manlicher, which is worse than the kar, as well as the zk-383, beretta m1918, which is worse than the mp40.
Some weapons are not very effective.
If you do take on this, it’s better to mention all weapons, otherwise it seems to be an advantage to a particular side rather than fighting injustice in
mas is trash but manlicher is a fast firer comparable to ross which is just a 5 round enfield. Which are all top tier bolt actions. I would always take manlicher over kar. Why do you think zk is worse than mp40? Also, m1918 fills a different role, i don’t feel its fair to compare it to mp40 this way (though, i vastly prefer the mp40)
m1 carbine sucks, but only because it have too high recoil and TERRIBLE visual recoil
seriously entire gun smacks into your face every shot
i would rather take chance with basic springfield
honestly maybe just fix visual recoil and it will be good
as it is i cannot use the m1 carbine
I think M1 carabine shiuld be rebuild like Springfield with Pederson device.
It can be comfortable semiauto rifle with good recoil and not big damage per bullet.
It already doesn’t have big damage per bullet, and the Pedersen Device is chambered for 7.65 French Longue, which is a pistol cartridge less than a third as energetic as .30 carbine.
1 Like
As a gun owning american with a M1 carbine, Garand, Mosin, springfield, enfield, and Schmidt-Rubin.
I too go to the range.
Grandpa hated the Carbine because of how many rounds it took to put a man down in Korea.
The carbine was trash in the jungle. Wouldn’t penn underbrush. The m16 was worse for similar reasons.
The Garand is king.
1 Like
Always glad to talk to a fellow shooter.
I have no trouble at all believing that the .30carbine is underperforming in the jungle, or has less trouble with thick brush than .30-06. There’s no reliable data, though, that indicates the carbine was any worse than the garand at stopping the enemy at appropriate ranges, if the enemy was hit. I’ve read and heard accounts from guys who had them who swore they’d hit the enemy several times before they went down, only to find him with one or two holes. The biggest problem with the Carbine, outside of the jungle (since we don’t have those in the game) is that it’s light weight and short length contribute to misses if you slap the trigger in the heat of battle, which the game’s accuracy cone/bloom mechanics already account for without the ridiculous visual and mechanical recoil.
Same, too many video game only exposed.
effective range is what, 200 yards before extreme drop for the M1 Carbine where as the Garand is a 1k yard designed gun.
To top it off some of those carbines were given a very light barrel. 1 mag dump and you wont hit a barn door at 100 yards.
Won’t do that with the garand.
My point is that the Carbine is just fine for what it is and what it’s designed to do. It’s not meant for long range precision marksmanship, and it’s poor reputation is largely because American military doctrine, training, and culture, especially during WW2, were focused on long range marksmanship. Yeah, the Garand was an excellent weapon for the time, and yeah, it can be lethal at 1000yds if you can see the enemy and make a hit, but the average combat range was between 100-400 yards, and there was a lot of urban environment ops. I’d take the carbine in a house clearing/ street patrol over the garand every time.
Sure, and in a house or across a street it handles fine. But any time I want to even slightly reach out and touch someone? It fails to perform.
Thats why I’d say the devs modeled its damage fine. It shouldn’t be performing at distance AT ALL.
I’ve had mixed results. All depends on if the first round puts them into injured or not with that Carbine. I find a few bots first rifle rounds take me on the 2nd to 3rd shot when youre going after a group.
Something that would interest me. Does the game account for pass through hits? If I’m at close range with the garand, AT gun or MG. will the round continue on as a FMJ should and zip the squad?
It doesn’t, but realistically if they modelled that it would even do it at what this game passes as long range. Hell, the problem with the Carbine and stopping the enemy is mostly that it’s small, and zippy for what it is, and goes through them, but not fast enough to cause hydrostatic shock.
That is part of what makes the M1 Carbine a less lethal for man.
The 30 ball took more penetration in order to start to tumble than the 30-06. The hydrostatic shock is one thing. The permanent cavity left behind is what kills.
A bullet that tumbles on contact leaves the biggest hole.
That would be interesting. if they took into consideration the amount of flesh the bullet travels through for the wound potential.
This is part of why if you get shot cleanly through an extremity its more like a hole, less like a crater. not enough meat to cause the bullet to tumble.
I have been digging for a WW2 ballistic chart for the ammo they used on the Garand. I found the .30 ball. Looks like 20cm of penetration before tumbling.
