Quote Originally Posted by a_humble_lich View Post
Interesting, I had the complete opposite response. I would have thought it would be used as more of a defensive infantry weapon in the fashion of WWI machine guns. Not something that would be used to attacked, but as rather as support to keep the unit from being charged.
That's the role of a heavy machine gun - and those were already being experimented with (Gatling, Agar, Williams). The French Mitrailleuse was viewed as a kind of replacement for cannister shot for artillery. The new rifled muzzle-loading cannons had poor dispersion of shot, so they used machine guns to provide close range (for artillery) support against infantry formations. That was the theory anyway, although they did seem to do a decent job at the Battle of Gravelotte in 1870.

Typically, I imagine, the defender wants to keep the attacker as far a way as possible. That's not to say sub-machine guns wouldn't be useful in repelling an attack, but that their light-weight, mobility, and short range, seem to make them better offensive weapons. Interesting that we are already debating their role. :-)