In a question, in a game of the old Lock N Load Publishing game, World at War: Eisenbach Gap, it was asked, if a charge where soldiers run several hundred meters to engage the enemy in our days seems unrealistic.

Mark Walker, owner of Flying Pig Games stated:

Im not an infantry guy (Navy, thank you very much), but Ive been reading a lot about Vietnam combat lately. Many engagements did feature assaults by troops covering a few hundred meters of ground, even against prepared positions. I think we are conditioned to believe a couple of well place machine guns turns any open ground into Verdun. But, infantry from 1918 forward move in spread out packets instead of lines, under cover of suppressing fire. Troops with assault rifles have nearly the same firepower as light machine guns, and can contribute to their own suppressing fire. Yup, its still very dangerous, and the assault rules reflect that.

Now, Im not saying the games rules are perfectly accurate for every situation; they probably are not. But, they have the advantage of giving infantry a more dynamic role in the game than other platoon level tank oriented games Ive played over the years. Perhaps the rules let infantry accomplish in one or two turns what might in reality take a number of turns to get done. But, they work well, IMHO.
I have to agree with Mark on this one... perhaps many of we WWII gamers are so used to running into the teeth of German MG42s, that we forget the power of the modern military rifle, compared to say, a WWII M1 Garland. That, and the nature of assault tactics in modern times combine for quite a potent mix.

FYI to my scenario being played: "Assault" combat is meant to represent any high-intensity combat between units at ranges less than 150m. In the scenario I am playing, the assaulting units are all armor in this case the tanks and AFVs aren't engaging in melee combat - they're firing at battlesight ranges or less.