MachinePistols in WWI

If I had the ability to send 500 000 Mac-10 machinepistols in either calibre back in time to Britain and France in January of 1915, would it have any impact on the outcome/happenings of WWI?

Attached: Untitled-1.jpg (1200x880, 574K)

Dick all. More warm bodies and more arty.

This if you really wanted to change the outcome send back 500,000 Davy Crockett nukes with at least 5 launchers for them.

Someone post the gif of hicock gunning down the running nigglet with the mac

Bonus: edit hicock’s head with this French dude’s, and put a German helmet on the niglet for maximum kek

No. Please go to youtube and watch the channel The Great War. It's a good first place to start if you know dick all about WWI. The problem with WWI, especially in 1914-1915, was not the armaments, it was the horrendous tactical mistakes.

ww1 could have been resolved in one christmas morning prove me wrong

The troops would still have to walk through kilometers of mud while withstanding MG and artillery fire. Sure they may be able to clear trenches better but you need to remember that 99% of the time soldiers arent firing their guns. Most of their time would be spent sitting in a trench and just waiting for an assault or their leave time. Trench warfare is still trench warfare regardless of the small arms

send 1 desert storm era armored division back then instead

It certainly would be easier to carry.

Ywn storm a trench dual wielding Mac10 and mow down the hun

I want to go back in time and give 4 M134 Miniguns, with 10,000 rounds each, to the Texians at the Alamo.

imagine how much better our world would be today if it had ended right then and there.

Could you imagine the insanity of a platoon of guys with mac 10s running around an enemy trench though?

Yes, it would have greased trench warfare. What exact calibers were those though?

Nothing more substantial than them running around an enemy trench with shotguns and early SMGs. The rest of the WWI era tactics would make that advantage moot regardless

this!
No ww2, militarism all over the world!

Attached: 1329068399414.jpg (641x534, 106K)

Dick all. Really expensive to make tooling and magazines for guns that can barely throw lead 100 yards.

Better idea.

Give them high points or jiminez .25s.

Get that hun on the run

According to Battlefield 1, everyone wielded Beretta M1918 SMGs, so why would Mac-10s matter?

inb4 they install volley sights on them

The piece of man portable infantry equipment to send would be 50,000 portable radio sets.

The major MAJOR problem which extended the war is that it was too difficult to call for reinforcements and liase with command for further instruction if a breakthrough was made (and they were made fairly regularly) because you had to send a runner or a pigeon and wait for him to go across no mans land and return, often getting incapacitated on the way and thus never bringing the vital information. This limited the war to "taking small bites" rather than the desired "breakthrough, surround and eliminate"

Portable radio communication was the one major element that enabled maneouver warfare to return and combined arms tactics to emerge & when combined with armoured vehicles and aerial reconnaisance it's what DEFINES modern warfare. I'd have all my troops armed with muskets and take radios over M4s with no radios.

Attached: KY38Manpack.jpg (718x900, 687K)

>I like to use my brain to think

10/10, only good post in this whole shitshow

Was I the only one hoping BF5 would go back to modern times after seeing how WWI was treated?

The krauts had to go and fuck up a perfectly good autismly perfect plan and then America stuck there dicks where they didn't belong in an era of colonialism and British "slap down the uppity jerries". God forbid the nation behind dominating India and the opium war have a semi competent continental rival. Fuck England.

Krauts shouldn't have tried to build a Navy. Really rustled the Anglos jimmies.

Bravo. Truly every kiss begins with Jow Forums.

Attached: qz2eg132via11.jpg (720x960, 63K)

They would be dealt with just like the other assault parties - hand grenades and pre-directed artillery. There was a plan for the defense of every foot of trench. Mac-10s, or the Lugers or Mauser c96s with drum magazines would not make a difference. Because the real problem is the heavy machinegun trained on every sector.

The only mechanical edge that might make a difference, could be a few dozen lightly armored vehicles capable of speeds in the 50+ mph range. They'd be sufficiently armored to withstand the cold HMG ammo of the period, drive much faster than the artillery's capability to react to them and so flank the enemy forces and strike at juicy targets like ammo storages, trains and high level staff quarters. Even if the weapons were just a HMG and a couple of mortars per vehicle plus maybe ten troopers inside, 20 such vehicles could cause total mayhem and maybe even break fronts.

It would be a suicide mission, of course. No fuel for the return, and even M98s wipe out elite troops if there's enough of them, and although the artillery would be stymied the sappers would be closing in pretty quick.

There already were armored cars in WW1. of course. I merely suggest modern armor and speed.

The main problem France had earl in the war was using old tactics against German machine guns.

If you gave the French some sub machine guns it would help them once the trench lines where dug.

France had some pretty good heavy machineguns from the start of the war. They were familiar with the concept. Their biggest problems were that they were attacked by numerically superior enemies, through borders they had with neutral neighbors, and with static defense lines. It was something of a miracle that they were not simply overrun and completely occupied.