Bullshit Dale Dye tactical weapons carry.... it can be a fun game but why go to all the trouble of the historical detail in the setting, uniforms, weapons and then not get the basics of tactical movement right?
Brothers in Arms made a real effort to get that kind of thing right and emphasized flanking fire, etc.
What’s your beef with Dale Dye? Seems like a peculiar commment...
Not half as peculiar as your spelling of commment (sic)...
Dye takes the blame for a lot of notorious "reenactor-isms" in films and the reenactment community. Stuff that wasn't done in the Second World War, but hobbyists and general audiences now assume actually was, because of movies like SPR, Band of Brothers, etc.
Stuff like using Hawkins anti-tank mines as improvised Claymores, or the aforementioned BS tactical carry. Guys in World War II didn't carry the weapon on the shoulder, and they didn't exercise the level of trigger discipline we do today.
http://www.90thidpg.us/Equipment/Articles/WeaponCarry/index.htmlGreat article above on how GIs and others in World War II actually carried their weapons - as opposed to what we now see in the movies. I have great respect for the work Dye has done, for the most part, and for the general level of realism in films he's worked on. He really created a niche for himself. But he gets a fair share of blame too for introducing modern stuff from his own Vietnam-era service into older time periods - to the point that as we see in this thread, new generations of content creators are taking for gospel what he introduced in error.
All the major combatants taught their troops to carry their weapons at the trail, or low port arms - the whole high tactical ready, gun in the shoulder ready to fire is a modern convention. Which you now see in places like the cover of YANKS, or in this game.