Internet Movie Firearms Database - Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games - User contributions [en]

Talk:List of weapons used by U.S. Armed Forces

2014-05-22T19:24:54Z

James Woods: /* SCAR-L Still Used by 75th Ranger Regiment */

Thank you to whoever created this page, I've thought a lot about trying to do a page like this myself, since a lot of people on this site like to point out "That isn't what a solder/officer in such and such military of law enforcement agency would use in real life." Maybe if this page proves to be popular we could do other pages about other agencies. --[[User:AndCA|AndCA]] 22:06, 18 July 2012 (CDT)

Your very welcome :) everything on that page took about a month to make due to my schedule (and I'm only 15). I am planning on doing a page about the British and the Russian armed forces but I want to have this done first. [[User:Mr.Ice|Mr.Ice]] 22:17, 18 July 2012 (CDT)

I didn't know the Marines have started using the SCAR H [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:23, 18 July 2012 (CDT)

I may have gotten some incorrect info during my research, I'll look into it. [[User:Mr.Ice|Mr.Ice]] 22:31, 18 July 2012 (CDT)

Thank You for doing this, the fact that you are fifteen only makes me have more respect for you.--[[User:Dillinger|Dillinger]] 23:29, 18 July 2012 (CDT)

Mate, big respect for you for doing this! Well done! If you need any info on what the British Armed Forces do, please let me know, I can help with that!! Again, proper nice job mate!! [[User:Fixer|Fixer]]

::As far as I know the only use by the USMC of the SCAR platform was a variant of the 'L' model during trials for the M27. The H&K 416 was chosen. --[[User:Crazycrankle|Crazycrankle]] 01:26, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

Doesn't the Navy also use the M16A3 variant? [[User:Insertjjs|Insertjjs]] 6:37, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

Yes they do, my Seabee buddy's issued weapon is an M16A3 with a 203.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 11:56, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

Are we doing out of service rifles and shotguns as well? Wicked wikipedia gives a complete list if that helps he page.-[[User:Balin21|Balin21]] 12:30, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

Of course. [[User:Mr.Ice|Mr.Ice]] 12:33, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

== YES!!! ==

THIS IS AN AWESOME IDEA!!! One that I have been wanting to do for a while. Gets my 100% stamp of approval! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:33, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

Glad you like it I just hope this gets done soon so I can work on my next idea. [[User:Mr.Ice|Mr.Ice]] 08:55, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

When this one is done, how about one for the British Armed Forces, SAS and suchlike? --[[User:Taurus96|Taurus96]] 10:25, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

I have been thinking about one for the British I may do one like that next. [[User:Mr.Ice|Mr.Ice]] 11:32, 19 July 2012 (CDT)
:If you do, don't forget they recently adopted the LMT 7.62 as their new Sniper rifle/DMR [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 11:47, 19 July 2012 (CDT)
::That they do, but I don't think we have a page for it since it's not shown up in media yet. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 12:59, 19 July 2012 (CDT)
::No, it hasn't appeared in anything to my knowledge, and we need to emphasize that this page, like all other pages on IMFDb, is for weapons ''used in films, TV, or video games'', not an end-all list of every weapon ever used by an armed force. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 03:13, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

== SDM-R picture ==

I'm looking for a good shot of the Army's Squad Designated Marksman Rifle, but I can't find one. Can anyone help me out? --[[User:Dirty Harold|Dirty Harold]] 10:27, 19 July 2012 (CDT)
:I'm reasonably sure it's not that different from the M16A4, aside from subtle differences in the rails (DD M4Rail rather than KAC M5) and differences to the barrel which are hidden by the rails. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 10:27, 19 July 2012 (CDT)
:Never mind, then; I'll simply remove it on the grounds that's it's not dissimilar from M16A4 model. --[[User:Dirty Harold|Dirty Harold]] 11:33, 19 July 2012 (CDT)
:The SDM-R was a very limited trial program and it was only fielded to one unit before it was canceled and/or withdrawn from service. The SAM-R met a similar end when the Marines opted for the Mark 12 Mod 1 instead. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 16:34, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

== P226R ==

Don't the SEALs use the 226 with a rail now? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 11:01, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

:According to SIG the SEALs currently use a P226 with a Picatinny rail that is not the standard rail found on P226s. In the past they have used folded steel slides without any rail or other outward identifying marks. When they went to the stainless steel slides an anchor was added to be able to easily tell which were the new slides and which were the older model. At some point a rail was added during the use of the stainless slides, which lead to a complaint that not all light attachments worked on it (can't complain about an out of spec rail on a gun without a rail), so the current model was outfitted with a true 1913 picatinny rail. [[User:Dover500|Dover500]] 11:02, 20 July 2012 (CDT)

== Page name ==

Should the "firearms" be changed to "weapons", as there are several things on here that I would not call firearms, such as the grenades, mines and launchers. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:15, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

I say go for it if accuracy is the case [[User:Mr.Ice|Mr.Ice]] 12:22, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

== USMC SOCOM ==

Should the listing of USMC SOCOM be changed to USMC MARSOC since MARSOC is the branch of the USMC that is a part of SOCOM. I think USMC SOCOM just sounds odd because it describes the USMC ''branch'' of SOCOM. This is just my opinion, what do you guys think? --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 13:22, 19 July 2012 (CDT)
:Done.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 13:59, 19 July 2012 (CDT)
::Thanks. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 14:00, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

== Magazine capacities ==

Great idea Mr.Ice. Anyway, is it OK if I add the various magazine capacities for the firearms with the caliber in parentheses beside it?
:It is already there... Under "Capacity"... And sign your post. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 17:04, 19 July 2012 (CDT)

== Colt Rail Gun ==

I think it's been adopted very recently to replace the Kimber ICQB, should it go on the page?--[[User:Recon42|Recon42]] 06:35, 20 July 2012 (CDT)
:it is already on there as the [[Colt XSE]], it is the same gun as the one pictured except with a desert tan finish and grips. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 06:49, 20 July 2012 (CDT)

The XSE along with the Kimber are also used by Army Special Forces and 1st SFOD-D. [[User:Puppet.of.fate|Puppet.of.fate]] 21:58, 24 July 2012 (CDT)
:Last time I checked the Special Forces still used M9s. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 08:56, 25 July 2012 (CDT)

They may use it or have used it but their regular sidearm is a M1911 variant or a Glock. The M9 and M9A1 are standard issue so it isn't uncommon for Special Forces to pick it up and use it once in a while. [[User:Puppet.of.fate|Puppet.of.fate]] 14:10, 25 July 2012 (CDT)
:I'm very interested to see your source on that. Last time I checked the only bit of the US Army to still use 1911s was Delta. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 15:49, 25 July 2012 (CDT)

In a number of 'Small Arms of the World' books I own along with a book co-written by General Carl Stiner, a former Commander in Cheif of USSOCOM. I would love to see the source of your info. [[User:Puppet.of.fate|Puppet.of.fate]] 17:36, 25 July 2012 (CDT)
:Let's jump straight to the photography then.
:*[http://www.americanspecialops.com/photos/special-forces/special-forces-medic.php Special Forces medic in Afghanistan, 2007]. Note the Beretta holstered on his belt.
:*[http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?114762-United-States-SOF-pics&p=6214829&viewfull=1#post6214829 US Army Special Forces at the Fuerzas Comando 2012 event.] Note the obvious M9 being reloaded in the first photo.
:*[http://www.soc.mil/UNS/Photo/2011/2011/album/slides/3SF_9350.html Special Forces NCO Instructor at the 2011 USASFC Soldier and NCO of the Year Competition]. Note the M9 in his holster.
:*[http://www.soc.mil/UNS/Photo/2010/album/slides/101005-A-Lxxx-001.html Army Special Forces soldiers conduct range training, 2010.] Every single one of them has an M9.
:*[http://www.soc.mil/UNS/Photo/2010/album/slides/100805-A-2913D-194.html Special Forces training at Fort Carson, Colorado. 2010.] Holstered M9s.
:In short, for a weapon not regularly used by US Army Special Forces, there's a lot of images of US Army Special Forces with M9s. Note though that I am only calling you out on your assertion about the 1911; there's plenty of evidence for Glocks in the last year or so. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 02:46, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

Well I can't tell you you're wrong and I will correct what I said and admit they apparently do use it more often then I thought but you can't honestly tell me I'm wrong either when my source material clearly states they do use M1911 variants. We are talking about Special Forces here so what they use is honestly their choice.[[User:Puppet.of.fate|Puppet.of.fate]] 13:29, 26 July 2012 (CDT)
:And yet nowhere in the 1200+ images I checked through did I see a single 1911 pattern pistol aside from two presentation pieces. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 13:35, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

Just because they're not there, doesn't mean they don't exist. You can't find everything on the internet. [[User:Puppet.of.fate|Puppet.of.fate]] 13:55, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

:Well, if the 1911 was the standard sidearm of the US Army Special Forces, don't you think there would be a lot of pictures of them with the 1911? When were these books of your's written? --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 14:10, 26 July 2012 (CDT)
::For the record, the General who co-wrote one of the books he cited retired in '93.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 14:11, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

His retirement date has no relavence. He's former Special Forces and Commander in Chief of USSOCOM, I'm pretty sure his information would be pretty up to date when he wrote the book. The book he co-wrote was published in 2002 and the most recent one I have of the other's is from 2007. And no, I don't think they'd have pictures all over the internet of them, they're Special Forces, and I honestly don't believe he searched through 1200+ photo's of them to gather his info. [[User:Puppet.of.fate|Puppet.of.fate]] 15:37, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

:Okay, there might not be a lot of pictures of the SF, but there is at least 1200+ talked about here, and out of 1200+ not one of them shows the SF soldiers with their supposed "standard sidearm," the 1911. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 16:08, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

And as I stated before, just because it isn't there doesn't mean it doesn't exist. For the record I never stated it was their 'standard issue.' I said it was their regular sidearm. They're Special Forces, they have no 'standard issue.' Lets make this simple, no matter what I say you're not going to believe me, which is fine I know what I know and you know what you know. He can't find a picture of it and I have books that state it, its a discussion that won't end. It's an agree to disagree situation. [[User:Puppet.of.fate|Puppet.of.fate]] 17:35, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

:Well, regular sidearm means that it would be used in large quantities by them and yet we have no photographic evidence of them using the 1911. If we go by the fact that they can use whatever they want, why don't we just list every handgun and say, "There is a chance someone in the military is using one." There is a way to end this discussion, what are the name of these books that you got your info from? --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 18:54, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

[http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php Professionalsoldiers.com] ask them yourselves, they should know what they carry. (Most on there prefer Glocks btw.)-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 22:39, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

:I don't really trust PS, because anyone can go on it and post whatever they want. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 02:20, 27 July 2012 (CDT)

Not necessarily true, you have to be vetted to have certain user names and the "Quiet Professional" tag, they will actually go look through their class lists and etc to find out if a person is who they say they are, and if someone posts BS or w/e they get the boot-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 02:42, 27 July 2012 (CDT)

:It says in their bulletin board rules page that not every user is a "Quiet Professional," so they could be anybody. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 02:44, 27 July 2012 (CDT)
::I believe the implication here is that the ones with the "Quiet Professional" tag won't be talking out of their arse like regular users. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 02:51, 27 July 2012 (CDT)
:::Oh, okay, I misunderstood that. Okay, it seems like a much more reliable source to me now. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 05:01, 27 July 2012 (CDT)

== M11 Pistol ==

I wasn't aware that NCIS uses the P228 anymore. I thought they used the P229 DAK. I'm posting this to let you know why I changed it on the main page. Just thought I'd let you know. (By the way, if anyone has any comments, feel free to respond to me.) --[[User:Mormonpowerranger521|Mormonpowerranger521]] 15:30 (CDT)

According to (the ever-accurate, lol) Wikipedia, they no longer use the P228. However, it says that they also use the P239 DAK as well as the P229 DAK. --[[User:Dirty Harold|Dirty Harold]] 19:22, 24 July 2012 (CDT)

== Gun order ==

Right now the guns, particularly the out of service ones, seem to be in a pretty random order. What do people think would be the best way to categorise them by, alphabetically, chronologically, user or notoriety? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:28, 24 July 2012 (CDT)

:Chronologically sounds good, probably from earliest to latest. --[[User:Dirty Harold|Dirty Harold]] 19:30, 24 July 2012 (CDT)

:I agree, it will better in that order. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 20:03, 24 July 2012 (CDT)

:Done. At least for the out of service ones anyway. [[User:Jimmoy|Jimmoy]] ([[User talk:Jimmoy|talk]]) 13:25, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

== M4A1 ==
It needs to be notated that the M4A1 is only standard issue to special operations/ and Rangers. The M4 carbine (Semi and burst fire) is the standard rifle for front-line combat arms units in the US Army. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 21:28, 24 July 2012 (CDT)
:Done. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 23:26, 25 July 2012 (CDT)

== NCIS ==

So this page lists the weapons of the US Armed Forces, like the Army, Navy, Marines, etc. NCIS is a federal agency, not part of the Armed Forces. Should it be removed? --[[User:Mormonpowerranger521|Mormonpowerranger521]] 19:35 (CDT)
:NCIS is part of the Department of the Navy. --[[User:Dirty Harold|Dirty Harold]] 08:35, 26 July 2012 (CDT)
::OK, so I'll go ahead and add CID as well, as it's part of the Army. But should other federal agencies be added, as they are part of the Department of Justice or Homeland Security, and they are also technically part of the US Armed Forces as well? --[[User:Mormonpowerranger521|Mormonpowerranger521]] 16:48 (CDT)
::::The CID doesn't need to be there anyway, as the weapons they use are already listed with the US Army. The only reason the NCIS is listed (if it deserves to be here anyway, my opinion is that it shouldn't as is a federal law enforcement agency and not part of "Armed Forces") is that they use weapons that are not used by the regular Navy. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:56, 26 July 2012 (CDT)
::: Don't forget OSI (Office of Special Investigations), the Air Force equivelant. On an unrelated not, why would EOD use the Mk18? It's not like they need super-short weapons for CQB, they dispose of bombs.--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 17:52, 26 July 2012 (CDT)
::::EOD in most forces tend to use shorter weapons than regular infantry as they only carry weapons for personal defence, and the lighter weight of smaller weapons is a plus when you have to carry additional specialist equipment. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:56, 26 July 2012 (CDT)
:::So the question is, I guess, do we keep NCIS, and by that reasoning, add a whole bunch more federal agencies (DHS, FBI, ATF, etc.), or do we remove it as it technically isn't part of the "Armed Forces?" I vote remove. --[[User:Mormonpowerranger521|Mormonpowerranger521]] 19:02 (CDT)
:::::NCIS is a law enforcement agency of the Department of the Navy. Most of its special agents are civilian GS-1811 criminal investigators, however some of them are reservists or active duty military. The investigating agents of Army CID are either active duty enlisted special agents or active duty Warrant Officer special agents. Air Force OSI agents can be civilians, enlisted airmen, or Air Force commissioned officers. The Coast Guard Investigative service employs active duty enlisted personnel, along with reservist Chief Warrant Officers and civilians as special agents. --[[User:L.J. Gibbs|L.J. Gibbs]] ([[User talk:L.J. Gibbs|talk]]) 18:06, 5 April 2013 (EDT)

== SIG P239 ==

I have read somewhere that the P239 was issued by DEVGRU to plain clothes operators, does anyone know if this is true? --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 14:43, 26 July 2012 (CDT)
:I'm looking at a page right now that [http://www.americanspecialops.com/special-ops-weapons/sig-p239.php says the same thing], but there's no way to confirm it since it doesn't give a source. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 14:48, 26 July 2012 (CDT)
::That's actually the page I read it on, but I didn't trust it without a source. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 14:51, 26 July 2012 (CDT)
::Certainly, SIG aren't pimping it the same way that they do with the P226.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 14:53, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

== Colt XSE Image ==

Is it worth replacing the Colt XSE image with [[:File:ColtRailGun.jpg|this one?]] Since that's the actual weapon being adopted, not the XSE. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 11:57, 29 July 2012 (CDT)

:I think we should replace the current image with this one, it's more accurate. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 12:08, 29 July 2012 (CDT)

:What about this image? --[[User:Mormonpowerranger521|Mormonpowerranger521]] 13:51, 30 July 2012 (CTD)
[[Image:Colt rail gun.jpg|thumb|400px|none|Colt Rail Gun - .45ACP]]
That is no closer match than the stainless one, as the M45 will have a tan finish. I was the one who made the entry with the XSE image, the reason being that it was the only image on here and I didn't want to add an image of a gun that hadn't appeared in anything yet. But as someone has now uploaded the tan one, might as well use it. Also, the reason I originally had it listed as an XSE is because that it what we currently list the railed frame XSE (which is what this gun is) as. Colt currently markets it as the "Colt Rail Gun" but it was originally called the "Colt XSE Rail Gun". As it seems that Colt have now split them, I suppose it might be an idea to split them on the 1911 page into "XSE" and "Rail Gun" sections. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:18, 30 July 2012 (CDT)

== Confederate States of America ==

Insert "south shall rise again joke". Don't want to be technically but This page is for the US Armed forces, not the CSA armed forces [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 23:45, 31 August 2012 (CDT)

== Late 19th Century Special Operations Firearms? ==

This has nothing to do with this page per se, but of all the pages here this one is most fitting. I have been wondering what American "Special Forces" or what you would like to call them, would have used in the 1870/1880's?

If some soldiers/agents/assassains would been sent on a specific important mission, what firearms would they have used? Winchester 1873's? Sharps Carbines? Springfield Trapdoor Rifles? Spencer Repeating Rifles?

Would they use Shotguns? And what Handguns?

Thanks in Advance!--[[User:Z008MJ|Z008MJ]] ([[User talk:Z008MJ|talk]]) 10:06, 12 September 2012 (EDT)
:Short answer what people would consider American "Special Forces" didn't exist in the 1870/1880's. The closest thing to that would have been the Calvary, or maybe Buffalo Solders, both of which would have used the carbine version of whatever rifle was standard issue (I think the Trapdoor Springfield, but in the early 1870's it could have been something else). The prevailing strategy of that time period was still to have troops gather en mass when fighting each other. The modern idea of special forces comes from the First South African/Second Boer War (1899-1902). In this conflict the British saw the the effectiveness of the Boer Commandos in reeking havoc on there numerically superior forces. Later the British implemented the strategy within there own forces, to the point where they even borrowed the name of those specialized solders from there adversary ie commando (Boer=white South African of Dutch decent). [[User:Dover500|Dover500]] ([[User talk:Dover500|talk]]) 11:06, 12 September 2012 (EDT)

How about a hypotethical situation then? If ever there was a national threat coming from a single concentrated group of people, who obviously had no army, and soldiers were sent to eliminate them and everyone else at whatever place they resided, would there just be ordinary soldiers with Trapdoor Rifles sent there then?

Also, while not related to the army, what would the Pinkertons have used around that time?--[[User:Z008MJ|Z008MJ]] ([[User talk:Z008MJ|talk]]) 11:33, 12 September 2012 (EDT)
:In that hypothetical situation Calvary would be the first group sent in, most likely with light artillery for increased firepower. The main firearms would be Trapdoor carbines and colt SAA or Smith and Wesson model 3 revolvers. For the tactics that would be used, look at the conflicts in the midwest involving Native Americans, as that is rather close to the situation which you are describing. Pinkertons were known to use mainly shotguns and revolvers, as they tended to get in conflicts at close range, but as to specifics of which type of each I do not know. [[User:Dover500|Dover500]] ([[User talk:Dover500|talk]]) 12:26, 12 September 2012 (EDT)
::If you take the 7th Cavalry at the battle of Little Bighorn in 1876 as an example, they were generally armed with 1873 Trapdoor carbines and carried a pair of Colt SAA revolvers (sabred were not carried to cut down on weight and noise). The officers would have also potentially have carried personally purchased weapons which they would also use for hunting, such as Remington Rolling Blocks and Sharp's rifles along with shotguns and possibly Winchester 1873s. Custer himself was though to have personally carried a pair of custom Webley RICs and a sporterised .50 Remington Rolling Block rifle. Scouts would have carried a variety of weaponry, often having both a single shot "buffalo" rifle like a Sharp's for long range shooting along with a repeating rifle such as a Henry, Spencer or Winchester, plus whatever sidearms they had. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 13:03, 12 September 2012 (EDT)

Thanks, that is very informative. Were Henry's and Spencers still used at that time? I thought Winchester was all the rage then.

If no one has anything else too add then i have gotten enough answers, very helpful of both of you.--[[User:Z008MJ|Z008MJ]] ([[User talk:Z008MJ|talk]]) 14:08, 12 September 2012 (EDT)

== Experimental AA-12? ==

AA-12 shotgun should have been undergoing assessments in USMC since 2004... Are they being put into service? Should I add the AA-12s in the page?? --[[User:S9771773G|S9771773G]] ([[User talk:S9771773G|talk]]) 02:32, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

Oh no its alright， I have yet to see the Experimental section at the bottom of the page... Im just wondering if AA-12 has already enter service? --[[User:S9771773G|S9771773G]] ([[User talk:S9771773G|talk]]) 02:34, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

I doubt it. A full-auto shotgun is really a niche item. Just ''one'' shot with a 12 gauge will hit a human target like a sledgehammer at CQB ranges, full auto in the package seems like overkill. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 20:22, 6 April 2013 (EDT)

== HK45C Designation ==

I've seen on a few sites that the HK45C is designated the Mk 24 Mod 0 by the SEALs, I thought this was the designation of the P226. Are these sites wrong or is this the real designation and the SIG is actually the Mk 25 Mod 0? --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36|talk]]) 22:36, 5 October 2012 (EDT)

I wasn't aware it had a designation to start with. Although people do seem to be running under the assumption that because SIG called their new SEAL P226 replica pistol the Mk25, that must therefore also be the Real Steel designation. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] ([[User talk:The Wierd It|talk]]) 05:21, 6 October 2012 (EDT)

:I was going off of [http://www.tactical-life.com/online/tactical-weapons/hk45c-us-navy-seal/2/ this page.] --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36|talk]]) 10:13, 6 October 2012 (EDT)
:Personally I think the designations make more sense the other way around, since then it goes in adoption order (Mk.23 (SOCOM), Mk.24 (SIG), Mk.25 (HK45CT)). [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] ([[User talk:The Wierd It|talk]]) 11:06, 6 October 2012 (EDT)
::Wasn't the SIG adopted in the 80's and the Mk 23 Mod 0 adopted in the mid-90's? --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36|talk]]) 11:38, 6 October 2012 (EDT)
::Whoops. >.< [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] ([[User talk:The Wierd It|talk]]) 11:44, 6 October 2012 (EDT)
:::The services' designation systems aren't as organized as some like to think. Psychological warfare! LOL [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 08:16, 6 April 2013 (EDT)

I sent a message to my source in NSW regarding designations of both the P226 and HK45 and what he told me was that the old-spec P226s ''were'' previously designated MK24 Mod 0, but are no longer type classified anymore (being referred to as simply "P226"). The current P226s with the mil-std rail are indeed designated as MK25 Mod 0, while the MK24 designation now refers to the HK45. He added that the MK24 Mod 0 designation has been interchangeable for a while. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 11:11, 12 April 2014 (EDT)

== MSR ==

[http://blogs.militarytimes.com/gearscout/2013/03/08/official-psr-contract-award/ Seems the Remington MSR is the winner of the Precision Sniper Rifle contract.] [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] ([[User talk:The Wierd It|talk]]) 18:59, 4 April 2013 (EDT)
:Adding it to the page. Edit: Hope that's good enough. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 08:16, 6 April 2013 (EDT)

== Mk 12 ==
The US Marines should be among the users of the Mk 12. They use the Mod 1 version [http://www.silencertests.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=90&t=79591&view=next]. Scroll down, you can see a whole gob of pics of them in action. And these are rank and file, not MARSOC. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 08:16, 6 April 2013 (EDT)

== US Army use of M16A4s ==
This is a response to an edit removing the US Army from the user list for the M16A4. Here are two images of Soldiers with them in theater [http://i38.tinypic.com/33bg2fd.jpg][http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/-images/2007/03/05/3064/army.mil-2007-03-05-111046.jpg]. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 18:46, 16 May 2014 (EDT)

== SCAR-L Still Used by 75th Ranger Regiment ==

[https://www.facebook.com/190158030999896/photos/pb.190158030999896.-2207520000.1400293623./823589834323376/?type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Fscontent-b-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-frc1%2Ft31.0-8%2F1912479_823589834323376_1257661075_o.jpg&smallsrc=https%3A%2F%2Fscontent-b-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-frc1%2Ft1.0-9%2F1904115_823589834323376_1257661075_n.jpg&size=2048%2C1524&fbid=823589834323376 SCAR-L]
While most of them are using M4A1's with SOPMOD Block II, a few are still using the SCAR-L. This photo was taken in 2014.~James Woods

Talk:List of weapons used by U.S. Armed Forces

2014-05-17T02:37:32Z

James Woods: /* SCAR-L Still Used by 75th Ranger Regiment */ new section

Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

2012-01-02T06:42:57Z

James Woods: /* More guns */

See [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 1]] and [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 2]] for older discussions.

__TOC__

== HD Screenshots from the MW3 Commercial ==

Here's some screenshots from the MW3 Commercial starring [[Sam Worthington]] and [[Jonah Hill]]:

It might be a good idea to give this its own subheading (or even sub-page, there's a lot of weapons in the trailer). Usually we cover guns that appear in trailers and previews, but it's rather unique for a game trailer to have so many real weapons in it, and it'd look weird shoehorning shots from this trailer into the main page's gun entries. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:28, 18 November 2011 (CST)
:Here's some more screenshots from the same commercial. Note that I accidentally uploaded an existing screenshot. The following weapons appear in the commercial: FN SCAR-L, Czech Skorpions, RPG-7, M67 grenade, Barret M82, 9-Bang, M4A1 Carbine, M1911 and its modern variants, AKMS, Remington RSASS, M60E4, M16A2, and the M203 launcher. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 21:56, 18 November 2011 (CST)
::Actually, that "SCAR-L" is an ACR. :\ BTW, I just love this commercial for some reason. =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)
:::Seeing Sam Worthington in it just feels weird, since he's the star of BO. Do you think it was a dig at Treyarch? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:57, 22 November 2011 (CST)
::::Well, the rules on IMFDB state that commercials are not allowed to have their own pages. But maybe these screenshots can have their own section on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 main page as a "trivia special"? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 01:58, 23 November 2011 (CST)
:::::The thing is while commercials are not allowed, ''trailers'' usually are allowed on the main page. I think in this very unusual case this trailer has enough guns to warrant a page of it's own. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:52, 23 November 2011 (CST)
::::::Hmm... that would be nice to see a page about this trailer on here. But then again, we'd probably have other people complaining that it would be our obligation to also include pages for the live action trailer for Call of Duty: Black Ops, the Black Ops Zombies trailer and the Rezurrection expansion pack trailer. Personally I say put all these screenshots on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 page as a "trivia special", and if someone wants to add screenshots from the live action trailers for Black Ops and it's expansions, then I agree on the same deal; putting them on the bottom of the main page as a "trivia special" --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 07:36, 24 November 2011 (CST)
:::::::Naw, if you actually did the gun IDs properly for this trailer it'd be about the same size as the actual page. I think for this a sub-page is probably the best bet. And to be honest, if someone wanted to make the three pages you mention, I'd say the same would apply (and as to complaining, the standard "make it yourself if you want it done so bad" response would be fine). It's not like this is going to be a huge issue with games companies suddenly ''all'' having live action trailers with loads of guns in them. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)
In my opinion, I would rather create a small section for the commercial instead of making a separate page for it in compliance with Imfdb rules. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 03:34, 25 November 2011 (CST)
:IMFDB rules say nothing about trailers, only commercials which are ''not'' trailers are forbidden. I'm saying create a sub-page for it since it would be ''way'' bigger than a "small section" if you did it properly, which is how it should be done. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:26, 25 November 2011 (CST)

[[File:MW3Com 01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet ([[Sam Worthington]]) loads up his ACR during the opening battle in New York City.]]
[[File:MW3Com 03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet then switches to his dual Skorpions during the first engagement.]]
[[File:MW3Com 05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in Germany, The n00b aims an RPG-7 at an enemy sniper, as The Vet looks on in disbelief at such a choice.]]
^That one makes me laugh my ass off every time I look at it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:41, 22 November 2011 (CST)
[[File:MW3Com 12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b now shows off the skills he's learned from The Vet.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b ([[Jonah Hill]]) realizes the mistake he's just made in pulling the pin from his M67 grenade prematurely in the opening battle in New York City.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-02.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet draws his dual Skorpions. Interestingly, there are no holsters for these weapons. This could be a sly joke about game mechanics; in the games, the player's second weapon is indeed shown stuck to their back with no visible means of attachment.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet now stares down at an attacking Mi-28 "Havoc" helicopter...]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-04.jpg|thumb|none|600px|...and dodges an incoming missile from the Havoc.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b charges onto the war-torn New York City streets in typical n00b fashion; spraying from the hip and yelling a war-cry like you're Arnold Schwarzenegger. Just like any typical n00b, he also "noob tubes".]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-06.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Unfortunately, The n00b forgot about one thing; watch out for hidden landmines!]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-07.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet sneak up on the enemy sniper during the battle in Germany.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-08.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Watch, and learn!" The Vet once again tries to show The n00b how to prepare for combat properly during the battle in Paris.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-09.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b learns what it's like to fight in zero gravity in a recreation of the mission "Turbulence".]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-11.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Take a break big dog, I got this!" The n00b prepares to show that he's proven his worth on the battlefield.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in New York City, The n00b switches from his ACR to his M1911. Smart choice. Not bad for a n00b!]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-13.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b fires his M1911.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-14.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet walk side-by-side on the battlefield, as the trailer's tagline appears on the screen.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Another n00b ([[Dwight Howard]]) comes onto the battlefield, displaying the typical n00b mannerisms.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-16.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b whoops with joy after spraying the battlefield with his M16A2/M203 combo.]]

== Unknown grenade ==

Any idea what this is?

[[Image:MW3-Gasgren-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

It's the gas grenade Price throws when he's interrogating Waarabe. Looks almost like a VOG grenade with a pin stuck on one end, or an M34 after a crash diet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:21, 25 November 2011 (CST)

== Desert Eagle ==

Now that's settled, Evil Tim, can you do the same treatment to the slide markings, as I think it might actually say Desert Hawk rather than Eagle, but don't have anything on this computer to clear it up. Can make out though that this is a Magnum Research as the bottom line ends in ''Minneapolis MN''. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:08, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:[http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v453/GMCMA/Other%20stuff/2011-11-25_00070.jpg This is a slightly different gradient mapping] (you can still see the E, it's the same image, on photobucket to save server space), but it actually looks like the second word is completely missing. I don't see why, they thank MR and "Desert Eagle" (which is a separate thing?) in the credits. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)
::Thanks, to me it look like it says either "Hank" or "Hawk" and am assuming Hawk, as that is less mental. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:48, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:Ok, ok, calming down now. Here's where we get back to fun because the magazine is both correctly and incorrectly modelled!

:[[Image:MW3-Deagle-5.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

:Notice the spacing imples four holes in the magazine (a .44 would have 5) but the number of visible bullets I believe implies a .44 (a .50AE would only have three, unless the side of the top bullet at the side is supposed to be the side of the one at the ''top'' of the magazine). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]]

::Also, .44 Magnum is a rimmed caliber, and while I don't completely expect them to get this correct, the cartridges in the magazine are not rimmed, which would be characteristic of .50 AE rounds. Just a side note! --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:14, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::I think it is meant to be the .50 AE mag, but is thrown off by two thing. Firstly the top round is smaller than the other visible rounds, and looks like it overlaps the top one as well. Secondly, the window is too long on this gun, being about a 1/3 the total length of the magazine. On a real magazine (.44 or .50, they are the same apart from the holes) the window in only about 1/4 the length of the magazine. These two factors combined mean more bullets are visible than there should be. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:48, 25 November 2011 (CST)

::::The mags are pretty much made up to be just something to stick into the gun. They are so far from the real thing they can't really even be credited towards either gun.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:31, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Well, the number of "windows" does tell you how many rounds, and the spacing says 4 rather than 5, so it's just another mistake with 8 rounds in a 7-round magazine. You want horrible magazines you need to go back to the original MW, if you were ''lucky'' you'd have two completely flat bullets on the top that looked a bit like they were for the right kind of gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:37, 25 November 2011 (CST)

::::::Yes, but a mag window never extends into the feed lips like in the picture. lol... And honestly, I never looked at the original MW mags. I'll take your word there.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:50, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::Well, I'm probably going to redo those at some point because I hate that page. Also, the window does that, I imagine, because they're BS'ing based on an Airsoft magazine, where the feed lips are instead the plastic top of the mag with the BB feeder and gas vent. I guess they knew there was a hole in the side of the magazine (which on the Airsoft version isn't a hole but a dip containing a little latch that releases the slide and such), knew there were feed lips, but weren't sure how the two things interacted with each other. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:55, 25 November 2011 (CST)

::::::::Lol yea we'll just go with that explanation... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:58, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::::The top of the magazine is correct, and the windows does extend up into the feed lips like this. See here for a side by side comparison of both .50 and .44 magazines showing this: http://www.magnumresearch.com/docs/MagazineOffer.pdf. It also seems like the crimp on the front of the magazine is different for the two calibers, but you don't get a good enough look at the magazine to work out which, if either, the game magazine is based on. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:08, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::::::Yeah, you're right, I just checked a couple more images on Google to be sure. I can't imagine that does much for the life of the feed lips? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:18, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::::::: Yeaaaaa That explains why I've heard that the lifespan of DE mags are so short... Ok then lol --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 21:34, 25 November 2011 (CST)

== Mk 14 ==

So, I guess they just figured "nobody's going to throw their rifle on the floor and ''check'' it's the same one the other guys are using, right?" And they'd have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for us meddlin' kids. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:52, 25 November 2011 (CST)

... what's the problem? --[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 04:51, 27 November 2011 (CST)

:The "Mk14" and "M14 EBR" are actually the same model (the Mk 14 Mod 0), even though it seems they want you to think the "M14 EBR" is the Mk 14 Mod 1 from the previous game. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:17, 27 November 2011 (CST)

== Since it's locked... ==

Can a mod change the bit about the M65 Atomic Annie?

"A doctored image of the nuclear test Upshot-Knothole Grable can be seen in some maps as a movie poster. Grable was a shell fired from an M65 Atomic Cannon and the W9 nuclear artillery shell was itself a modified antiaircraft gun."

Atomic Annie fired 280mm shells. There were never any 280mm AA shells, and the design of Atomic Annie itself was based on German railroad guns, not an AA gun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:49, 28 November 2011 (CST)

:You're misreading. The W9 round ''itself'' is a modified antiaircraft gun which fires one subcritical mass at the other. The M65 is a gun which fires a gun which is a bomb. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:32, 28 November 2011 (CST)
::If it's just a gun-type fission device, can you clarify that? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 11:35, 28 November 2011 (CST)
:::Just did that before reading. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:41, 28 November 2011 (CST)
::::Thanks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 11:47, 28 November 2011 (CST)

How come the page is locked anyway? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:55, 28 November 2011 (CST)

== M4A1 ==

A quick query about the M4A1 used in the game, as you may be able to see in the pictures below the M4 is equipped with a rail riser, including when using the hybrid sight.

[[File:MW3-M4-1.jpg|600px]]

[[File:MW3-M4-2.jpg|600px]]

The EOTech XPS-3 part of the hybrid sight is situated on the lower rail whilst the magnifier is on the rail riser. Wouldn't this mess up the alignment between the two? Doesn't really look right to me but would like anyone else's input. --[[User:Noble.6|Noble.6]] 15:50, 28 November 2011 (CST)

:[[Image:MW3-M4-5.jpg|600px]]

:If you zoom in and look carefully there's a silver plate between the base of the XPS-3 and the rail which raises it up to the same level as the riser. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:22, 28 November 2011 (CST)

::Ah, thanks. Seems like a lot of trouble to go to though... --[[User:Noble.6|Noble.6]] 16:48, 28 November 2011 (CST)

:::It's most likely that they designed the rifle before they decided to use this sight with it. A bit like how they just stuffed the RSASS into "Blood Brothers" even though the level was blatantly designed for the Barrett. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:52, 28 November 2011 (CST)

== "USP Tactical" ==

I would just like to point out that the supposed USP Tactical isn't one; it still has the regular USP's fixed iron sights for one thing. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 05:33, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:And has markings on it saying "USP Tactical," plus an extended barrel. It's a USP Tactical with the wrong iron sights. This is hardly impossible, since the Tactical uses the same dovetails as the standard USP slide so there's no reason you couldn't swap irons.

:[[Image:Whatdoesthissay.jpg]] [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:01, 2 December 2011 (CST)

So? Every other USP in the series had said extended barrel, but we didn't call them Tacs. Plus it's not like they've ever used correct trades before. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 06:27, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:Ok, let me just copy-paste what I said ''last'' time this came up, adding the CoD4 USP since I have that too now:

:Here's an angle-for-angle comparison of the player models:
:[[Image:MW1-USP-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP in ''CoD4''. ''Barely visible'' barrel, slide says "(HK logo or something like it) USP .45 Auto." This is a USP 45.]]
:[[Image:MW3-Nottactical.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP from ''MW2'' in ''MW3''. Slide wording "(front cocking serration) USP .45 Auto." Has ''very slightly'' visible projecting barrel. This is a USP 45.]]
:[[Image:MW3-USPTac-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|USP Tactical model. Slide says "USP Tactical .45 Auto," has ''highly'' visible (and therefore longer) projecting barrel. This is a USP Tactical.]]
:The new one has a longer barrel and correctly calls itself a USP Tactical on the slide, while the original is just a malformed USP.
:Let me just break this down:
:*Someone decided they needed a new USP model.
:*They made a new USP model which has features correct for a Tactical, and slide engraving saying it's a Tactical.
:*They decided to use the old MW2 USP model as well for no good reason.
:*They decided to call both the USP 45, also for no good reason.
:Hence, there are two gun models, the old mutant USP and the new Tactical. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:I imagine, given the shorter extended barrel, the LAM in the first game and the possibly recycled from dev model rear sights in the second, the CoD4 / MW2 USP was originally going to be a Mark 23, and they kept the old barrel on the model for some reason. This new one's is in proportion for a USP Tac, and it ''says'' it's a USP Tac on the slide (which is a distinguishing feature of a USP Tac, after all). This is enough to upgrade it from mistake to intent, and the sights aren't impossible to swap between models and so aren't distinctive of the non-Tac model. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:01, 2 December 2011 (CST)

::Just beat me to it. Was going to say that the rear sight and the raised part of the slide it sits on, and the amount of barrel projection was from a Mark 23 as well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:10, 2 December 2011 (CST)

== "MG36" ==

This image is from the official H&K site.
[[Image:G36K-2.jpg|thumb|none|450px|Just ignore the buttstock, willya.]]
They list it as a G36K, even tho it has a longer barrel. Maybe H&K classifies these guns based on the handguard and vent holes. It would make sense, as the barrels are interchangeable. Thoughts? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 16:11, 3 December 2011 (CST)
:Not sure the barrels are interchangeable, as the gas block would be in the wrong place. I suppose you could put the correspondingly longer piston on (not sure if this would work but lets assume it would) but then the piston would be exposed, with the front part of it along with the gas block sticking out the front of the handguard. It would be exposed to dirt and damage, and would look weird. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:52, 3 December 2011 (CST)
H&K makes a LMG/support gunner version of the G36 (don't remember the exact name). It looks just like your photo but as far as I know it's usually outfitted with a 100 round drum magazine instead of the normal 30 rounder. The name "MG36" is really just made up so the poor sap playing this game that knows nothing about gun would immediately associate the MG with machine gun. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 16:33, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:I can't really see how a weapon with a non-carbine barrel is still a carbine, personally. Though it would hardly be the first time HK's marketing spods were guilty of making things up as they go along. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:49, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:Wait a minute, HK's page has the disclaimer "The pictures shown may differ from the original." Isn't that an aftermarket stock, for a start? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:58, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::The barrel extends past the handguard by a similar amount (slightly less I think) as on a G36, but the G36 handguard is longer, meaning that this is actually an intermediate barrel between the 318mm barrel of the G36K and the 480mm barrel of the G36. I believe the origin of this variant was that it was submitted for Norwegian (I think) army trials, and it has something like a 16" barrel. It now goes by the name G36KV3 I think. The stock isn't an aftermarket one, I think it was designed by H&K for the Latvian army. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:00, 3 December 2011 (CST)
:::Did a bit more searching and found that it is a 15.4" barrel, and the variant also appears to go by G36CQB. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:04, 3 December 2011 (CST)
::::Ah, only place I'd ever seen that stock was on Airsoft gun pictures saying it was a G&P "KV style" stock. So, we're saying this is probably a 15.4" barrel G36K? I doubt this variant has existed long enough to have been in ''Far Cry'', mind, so we should probably leave that saying hybrid. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)
:::::Apparently the G36CQB was listed in the HK Defence Weapons Systems Brochure from 2004 to 2006, so it is possible that this is what the [[Far Cry]] rifle is based on. This is 2nd hand info from the HK Pro forums so might be wrong though. Have also read that it was first introduced in the late 90s for the US market, but only 100 or so were made so these are rare. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 3 December 2011 (CST)
::::::This G36K, the one with the wierd aftermarket sights on a C rail and that stock, was made for one country specifically, though I forget which one. As for the carbine issue Tim, a carbine is simply a shortened version of the original, it can be any length as long as it's shorter. If it's a Carbine of a Carbine it's a Sub-Carbine. Not makin this up :) G36K = Carbine and G36C = Sub-Carbine. M4A1 = Carbine and Mk 18 Mod 0 = Sub-Carbine. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:42, 3 December 2011 (CST)
::::::Far Cry was march 2004, I wouldn't think they'd have time to stick a G36 variant that had existed for an absolute maximum of 3 months (and might not have existed at all yet) in the game. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:51, 3 December 2011 (CST)
:::::::All I could find was someone stating that it was in the 2004-2006 brochure, but could have appeared before this point. Like I said, the first versions of the G36CQB barrel appeared in the late 90s. It is probably more likely that they just made it up accidentally though. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:54, 3 December 2011 (CST)
::::::::Ok, I'll add a note there and fix this when I get home, then. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:02, 3 December 2011 (CST)
:::::::::I have a copy of Soldier of Fortune magazine from October 2001 that says the 15.4 inch CQB barrel is an option--[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 20:53, 3 December 2011 (CST)
::::::::::Ah, CQB ''barrel'', that's starting to make sense. So this is a CQB barrel for the G36 that they marketed for the K under the same name, even though it made the K longer and therefore only helped you CQ if the B was using it as a lance. Also, if this can be fitted to the standard G36, might it be the cause of STALKER's short-barreled G36E? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:47, 4 December 2011 (CST)
:::::::::::Could be. :| - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 07:26, 4 December 2011 (CST)
::::::::::::The G36 from STALKER is actually modelled after a SL8 converted into a G36 lookalike (can tell by the profiling at the back of the receiver with a serial number plate, the selector switch and aftermarket magazine well fitted into machined out lower receiver). As for the barrel, it looks more like a CQB than a K. The K has an open pronged flash hider (as opposed to the birdcage shown) which would protrude past the handguard on a full size G36 but none of the barrel itself would be visible. I'm going to copy this whole discussion over onto the [[Talk:Heckler & Koch G36|G36 talk page]], as I think it has reached the point that it is more relevant there than here. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:10, 4 December 2011 (CST)

Sorry I was out of this for so long guys. As far as I remember, the G36 uses a quick-change barrel system (eventually used the the ACR and SCAR). You could go from CQB barrel to MG barrel at the flip of a tab and twist of the barrel. H&K figured out over time that they could simply market the same gun with different barrels and people would pay for two guns instead of one and a second barrel. Yes, the people at H&K are some of the biggest jerks out there. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 14:54, 4 December 2011 (CST)

:Or maybe you only wanted a full length G36 with a shorter barrel. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:16, 4 December 2011 (CST)

The G36K pictured above is a G36KV of the Latvian armed forces. They use longer barrels (15 or so inches, I believe) on them than factory G36Ks. Here you can see one in A-Stan [http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v101/He219/mpnet/hires_090318-A-1211m-002a.jpg]. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 08:57, 20 December 2011 (CST)

==Oakley Gloves==
[[File:RSASS MW3 being loaded.jpg|thumb|none|300px|The black (Oakley?) gloves in question. Notice the great detailing in the gloves' pads and stitching by the MW3 engine.]]
Slightly irrelevant from the realm of guns, but I know that Delta Force members use the tan Oakley Factory Pilot gloves, but what are the ones that Soap and Yuri use during their Prague raid? I would suppose they're just the black ones, but could someone please verify? --''[[User:Blemo|'''B''''''le''''''mo''']] [[Image:Progress Wheel.gif]] [[user talk:Blemo|'''TALK''']] • [[Special:Contributions/Blemo|'''CONTRIBUTIONS''']] • [[Special:Emailuser/Blemo|'''EMAIL''']] • '''MESSAGE'''''
:I don't think they are actually Oakley gloves. Rather than the hollow "O" that is on the first section of the finger of genuine Oakley gloves, these appear to have a plain solid stud, which you tend to find on cheaper Oakley rip-off gloves, so imagine that is what the actual gloves were modelled off of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:23, 20 December 2011 (CST)

I thought everyone seemed to have SIs? (or were supposed to, keeping in mind the knockoff point above) [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 08:19, 20 December 2011 (CST)

== More guns ==

In MP on unlockable embelms and titles: a Bereta 92 Inox, slide of a 1911type gun, flintlock pistol + Mk2 grenade on achivment "Strike!". These needs to be added to page - Paul
:+ kind of unrelated to this but it'd be noted that the ump STILL hold 32 bullets by default, and the CM901 holds 30 bullets, but I think it is suposed to be the .308 cal variant which holds only 20. - Paul
: in SP theres a MP5 w/ slimline forearm and w/o magrelease paddle on a sign during the levl with the sandstorm. -Paul
: On "Black Tuesday", the US troops that show up with the Stryker have M1911s holstered on the front of their tactical vests.--[[User:James Woods|James Woods]] 00:42, 2 January 2012 (CST)

Talk:Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol

2011-12-20T21:43:36Z

James Woods: /* Random thoughts from seeing the movie in IMAX */

What is the pistol used by Simon Pegg in the 3rd SIG screenshot? Am fairly sure it isn't a P226 as stated. Might be a Glock 17, but the front profile looks too tall/narrow. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:37, 29 June 2011 (CDT)
:Has now been changed to say it is a Glock 17, which I admit is closer, but compare the pic of Renner with the Glock 17 to Pegg. They are both held at a similar angle, yet the front view of the guns looks drastically different, with Pegg's lookng much taller/thinner. Maybe it is just lighting though. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:33, 1 July 2011 (CDT)

Not a Glock - that's for sure. Though that front sight looks Glock, the bore-axis is all wrong. If I look quickly, I think P250, but then I waiver. Definitely Sig though.
--[[User:Gwhysow|Gwhysow]] 17:47, 31 October 2011 (CDT)

I don't know, if you look closely on the slide, it looks like it has Glock type markings.Plus the slide release appears to be the same as other Glocks. Possible Non Gun? [[User:Bristow8411|Bristow8411]] 17:20, 19 December 2011 (CST)
[[File:MI4 513.jpg|thumb|none|800px]]

== Some more screenshots ==

Some more weapons to be ID'ed. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 04:39, 4 July 2011 (CDT)

[[File:MI4 200.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]
[[File:MI4 202.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

[[File:MI4 204.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

:Top one looks like it could be a USP compact. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 06:34, 4 July 2011 (CDT)
::It is. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 16:39, 4 July 2011 (CDT)

USP Compact, Five-seven?, ???--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 21:33, 14 August 2011 (CDT)

*The bottom one looks like a H&K P7 with a suppressor and the slide locked back. Yay, unrealistic sparking bullets! :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 17:28, 15 August 2011 (CDT)

::The second one is propably a 1911 variant --[[User:Warejaws|Warejaws]] 19:34, 9 September 2011 (CDT)

Another two photos from the latest trailer:

[[File:MI4-pistol-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Brandt pulls the slide off a henchman's pistol.]]
[[File:MI4-pistol-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]

:: A Cougar --[[User:Warejaws|Warejaws]] 17:11, 31 October 2011 (CDT)

== The sig p226r==
The bottom picture on the Sig p226r section is the P226 TACOPS. You can tell my the extended grip well.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 20:47, 10 September 2011 (CDT)

I don't think this pistol is a TACOPS as it lacks the beavertail. Closest thing I can come up with is that it is a P226 Super Capacity Tactical fitted with the "Magwell" grips the TACOPS has. Proof will really be in the trigger, as the SCT is an older model and has the traditional trigger, as opposed to the TACOPS (which seems to have replaced it in the current SIG line-up) which has the new short reset trigger. Trigger is not visible in the trailer though, so will have to wait for the movie to come out to be sure. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:04, 31 October 2011 (CDT)

:If we're not sure that it's a P226 TACOPS, who the hell changed it? Personally, I don't think it is one...the screencap is too blurry to tell if the grip is extended, and Paula Patton might just not have very big hands (which most women don't). Until the movie comes out and we can confirm the identity of the pistol, let's just call it a P226R for now. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 11:04, 1 December 2011 (CST)

The picture is crappy...watch the trailer it does for sure have the extended grip and you can tell it has the tritium truglow sight on the front as well...yes it is possible someone put the extended grips onto a SCT but what would be the point of doing that? Its a Sig with all the features of the Tacops...i personally didnt change it but i think it the right gun.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 11:16, 1 December 2011 (CST)
:It doesn't have all the features of a Tacops as it lacks the beavertail, meaning that it is either a P226R with the slide changed for a Tacops one and magwell grips fitted, or it is a SCT with the grips added. Or it is a variant I am not aware of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:46, 1 December 2011 (CST)

Did some looking around and it seems like Sig did produce SCT models with the magwell grips on them...that would explain the lack of beavertail and why it has the tritium truglo sights.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 11:49, 2 December 2011 (CST)
:I'm not sure if SIG actually made SCTs with the magwell grips, but it was a common aftermarket mod as shown below:
:[[File:P3300159.jpg|thumb|400px|none|SIG-Sauer P226 Super Capacity Tactical fitted with Magwell grips - 9x19mm]]
::I've also photo shopped the Magwell grips onto an SCT, think this is a better picture:
::[[File:P226 SCT shopped.jpg|thumb||none|400px|]]
::--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:50, 2 December 2011 (CST)

==Kremlin==

The Russian Guards at the Kremlin wouldnt use a SKS in real life would they?--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 20:15, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:Ceremonial guards, which those soldiers are supposed to be, use the SKS while parading: [http://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/2009/12/phdstudent-1.jpg Kremlin Guards] --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 21:25, 30 November 2011 (CST)

Sad!...how embarrassing for them.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 09:28, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:!? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:16, 1 December 2011 (CST)

What's embarassing? They are ceremonial guards much like the 3rd Infantry Regiment here in the U.S. at Arlington. The ones that the public sees are there for a specific purpose but the remainder of the unit is at the ready in case of an incident. Are you going to tell the guards at Arlington that you're embarrassed because they carry M1 Garands when on duty? --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 22:25, 19 December 2011 (CST)

==Random thoughts from seeing the movie in IMAX==
Saw MI4 in IMAX this Saturday (the IMAX version was released a week early). It was an awesome visual treat, the 30 mins of IMAX footage look spectacular. The high-tech train car/safe-house that can be seen in the trailer had racks of what looked like G36Cs and and P226Rs, which have already been ID'd on the main page, and possibly the newest versions of the P229, not sure.

Question to you guys with real handgun service/repair experience, in the real world could some one reach over and remove the slide from a hand gun like Brandt does to the guard's Cougar? It seems to me that the slide should be much harder to get off, since wouldn't it fly off randomly in usage if it were as easily removed in the real world?

Also a kudos to the production team is that they seem to have gotten the actors (at least for Jeremy Renner) some decent firearms training because we see Brandt disarm Hunt of his handgun and then he releases the magazine from the gun AND releases the round in the chamber. Many actions movies seem to forget about the one already in the chamber when showing the hero removing the bullets from a handgun.

Also the fact that Jeremy Renner kept his finger off the trigger as he never intended on pulling the trigger.

:I think this is relatively easy to do with a Cougar as unlike other handguns you do not need to retract the slide at all. To remove it you just hold a button on the right side of the frame, flick the locking lever down and pull the slide forward. Not sure if you can do this with a loaded magazine in place though. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:42, 19 December 2011 (CST)

: Fixed something in that third paragraph --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 22:10, 19 December 2011 (CST)

:: I know that pulling forward on the slide use to allow it to be pulled off, as that was one of the reasons given for police to stick with revolvers for a long time, and was even taught somewhere as a disarmament technique (I do not remember where). I do not know if something more modern would still allow you to do this, or even if it is that easy to do (never tried it) but at least at some point in the not so distant past it was. [[User:Dover500|Dover500]] 08:16, 20 December 2011 (CST)

When they board the traincar, one agent was holding a sig 552.--[[User:James Woods|James Woods]] 15:43, 20 December 2011 (CST)

Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

2011-11-25T02:04:16Z

James Woods: /* Delta Force Weapons */

See [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 1]] for older discussions.

== KSG ==

Kinda surprised it never appears in singleplayer since it's supposed to be one of the "gimmick" guns for this game, has anyone seen one anywhere? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:07, 10 November 2011 (CST)

::Right now it's still in production. It was apparently a HUGE hit at the 2011 SHOT Show, however on the downside Kel-Tec is a pretty small manufacturer who happens to make pretty popular products, and that results in some pretty severe backlogging. I think they are planning on releasing it in early 2012 last I heard. The best part though is it's supposedly not going to be that expensive! --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 18:14, 10 November 2011 (CST)

::: This gun is out now! It's going for between $650 and $800 depending on where you shop. I found 6 different places selling it by putting a simple search into Google. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)

I think he meant in the game, but that's good news too!--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 16:22, 18 November 2011 (CST)

:I did. And now I've got one, I get to discover they got literally ''everything'' about it wrong. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:22, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Do tell :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:42, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::: LOL ooooooops! I haven't found the gun in single player, but I didn't do much searching either. But yea it's so messed up in the game (multiplayer). First, it's not a continuous fire shotgun. You get 7, then have to manually switch (not exactly sure how) to the other tube which holds another 7. Second, for being a 12 gauge, the damage is absurdly low. It took me an average of 3 torso hits to kill someone. Also, you would think they would give this shotgun to have slugs in one tube, and buckshot in the other! After all, that was the main idea behind the gun! Instant ammo switching or a lot of ammo in a compact package! AHHHHHHHHHHH!!! Way to ruin an awesome gun!!! --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 17:00, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::::In Survival it's 12 rounds and it's just treated as a standard shotgun; no switching tube mags. It's more or less just a crappier version of the Striker with even less damage and slow pump rather than semi-auto. Everything I've read implies it's 12 in multi too, which as I said on the page would only be true if it were using 3" shells; since it damages like it's using 1 1/2" shells loaded with sand, I'm just writing that up as an error. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:08, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== Mk 14 ==

on the pic Price's Mk 14 has a CTR stock so it is a Mod 1 --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 13:20, 10 November 2011 (CST)

== Soap's M1911 ==
In the pic of his holster, that's not a 1911. Looks like an M9, by the grips and slide safety groove. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:03, 10 November 2011 (CST)

== reload animations ==

A lot of the reloads are still carried from the previous games but what baffles me is there are plenty of guns that have a cocking handle on the left side and even some are the same gun like the MG36 and the G36 but both cock the charging handle from different sides. I was hoping the ACR would changed, but nothing really changed. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:42, 10 November 2011 (CST)

== Beefed up gun sounds ==

I am really liking the beefed up gun shots in this game [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:42, 10 November 2011 (CST)
::Lol... Everything but the ARs have good sounds, and everyone else's gunfire sounds great (ie. your standing next to them). Now I'll admit I'm only about 1/2 way through the ranking so I don't have all of the guns unlocked, so I don't know what some of the later guns sound like. I will say though, the Dragunov gunshot is incredible. I mean like 100% dead on. The L118 is the right sound, BUT NOT LOUD ENOUGH!!! That gunshot should be teeth rattling! The Barrett M107 is the same way; right but not loud enough! I just cope with it by cranking the volume when no one's home :D --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:36, 11 November 2011 (CST)

:::Actually, this was one of the things I really ''didn't'' like in this game, they all sound like they were made on a computer as opposed to being recorded. Think of the M200 in MW2, and a few others, they sound like, well, it's hard to describe, but something like metal hitting against metal? I dunno, but the Desert Eagle's sound in this is very bad compared to COD4 [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:31, 11 November 2011 (CST)

::::That's what I think the Assault Rifles and quite a few LMGs sound like. They finally fixed the pistols and sniper rifle's sounds, but totally messed up the others! What the heck? --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 14:50, 11 November 2011 (CST)

== Overall thoughts on the game ==
To be honest folks, this game turned out really good in the end. The gameplay doesn't feel as noobified like the last game was, the graphics, game engine and gameplay is more sharper and cleaner this time around as opposed to the glitches and bugs in second game, the multiplayer isn't so bland, the SpecOps feel more polished and fun, and the game's story explained a whole lot more stuff to the overall plot than Modern Warfare 2 did, and it left it on a more appropriate closure to the series. All in all, a good game. Maybe it's nothing groundbreaking in the "realism" factor (We'll leave that to Battlefield), but it still turned out to be a damn good game, and definitely worth the price. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 05:42, 11 November 2011 (CST)

::After watching the whole Singleplayer playthrough, and some MP stuff too, I agree. While (to me) it doesn't beat MW1, it sure is better than MW2 and BO. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:31, 11 November 2011 (CST)
:Modern Warfare 3 had the gameplay of Modern Warfare 2, but has more-balanced multiplayer content (though the multiplayer is obviously borrowed from Modern Warfare 2), gameplay, perks, satisfying story with clear parts (unlike Modern Warfare 2, which had a muddled plot), and like everyone said, realistic gun sounds. Even though it is not as successful or good as the older Call of Duty games and the other modern FPS games, it is overall the best video game set during modern times. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 20:33, 11 November 2011 (CST)

:::Well, it being the best modern shooter is your opinion, and I'm certainly not trying to say that it's ''wrong'', but for me MW1 and BF3 both take the that title. I agree with your summary though. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:21, 11 November 2011 (CST)

:We need more MOH up in here.-protoAuthor 18:52, 24 November 2011 (CST)

== MP5K? ==

Is there actually an MP5K in the game, or is this just an MP5A2 that someone misidentified ages ago? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:32, 12 November 2011 (CST)

:No, that is actually an MP5K (you can see the name on the right is "MP5K holographic," and the hold is with the PC's thumb covering more of the rail, implying it's shorter), it was just cut from the final game. It's quite likely that when the dev console codes come out you'll be able to call it up in singleplayer with a "give" cheat. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:45, 12 November 2011 (CST)

::As we all know a lot of things in Call of Duty games are copy-pasted from previous ones, and since what we see of the K looks identical to the MW3 MP5, and we can see the reload animation is copy-pasted from the MW2 K, so I'm betting they copy-pasted the whole gun, changed the model, but didn't change the name til after that video. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:26, 12 November 2011 (CST)
:::This MP5K (if that is what it is, am still not 101% convinced) isn't the one from MW2 as has different rail system and a solid butt. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:40, 12 November 2011 (CST)

::::You misunderstood, the MW3 MP5K we're looking at, and the normal MP5 in MW3 look the same. The game files for the MP5K were brought over from MW2, and it was given a new model and name, but the name hadn't been changed yet as of the video. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:53, 12 November 2011 (CST)

:::::I don't think so, the one labelled as an MP5K looks shorter. Edit: Actually, looking at the Spec-Ops trailer and my own caps you might be right, it's the MW3 MP5 but he's holding it like it's an MP5K because it doesn't have new hand positions yet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 22:35, 12 November 2011 (CST)

== RSASS Secondary Sight on the Wrong Side ==

Has anybody else noticed that the red dot secondary sight is mounted in the wrong (left) side? If your holding the gun as a rightie, than it needs to be on the right side so that the hand holding the pistol grip just has to twist outwards. With it being on the left side, you have to twist your hand inwards to be able to look through the sight, and between a pistol grip in the gut, no stock surface on your shoulder, a magazine getting in the way of your support hand, and a 100% unnatural face angle, it ain't happening. But what else is new. Go figure. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 08:09, 13 November 2011 (CST)

:You'd think you'd just put it on the top or side of the scope, regardless. But the left hold kinda works if you're willing to stick your "wing" right out for it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:16, 13 November 2011 (CST)

::I noticed that too but I just figured they wanted the player to see it. Even though it's wrong, I think it's still cool that they tried it. reminds me of Jerry Miculek doing a 3 gun match.--[[User:Acepeacemaker|Acepeacemaker]] 20:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::That's probably it, and also probably the reason for some other subtle reasons such as the Pechang LMG feeding from the wrong side and so on. I personally know that if I couldn't see it in game, I probably would forget about it. They pretty much dropped realism for gameplay. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 20:25, 20 November 2011 (CST)

== Barrett ==

Price used an M82A1 in Pripyat as the M107 wasn't even developed 15 years before 2011. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:30, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:Oh, whoops. Although a weapon not being invented yet has historically never been a problem for this series, you know. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:43, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::CoughBlackOpsCough..... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:53, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:::OMFG, is that a suppressed RSASS between the two RPG's? In '96? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:34, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::::See? SEE?! [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:42, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:CoD... CoD... -_- --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 09:02, 15 November 2011 (CST)

Also, the helicopter flying past is an Mi-28N (round ball above the rotor), which wasn't delivered until 2006. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:10, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:Exactly. I recently updated CoD4:MW's main page about that issue. But something else I would like to know if in anyway, is it matter if Price used the M82A1 rather than the L96, even though the British Army does using the M82A1? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:24, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::The range involved, you'd be pushing things with just a 7.62. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]]

:::Ah, okay. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:42, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::::Back then a Barrett M82A1 would be the correct weapon for an SAS sniper at long range. Although the M82A1 is still in the British army inventory, The AW50F tends to be favoured nowadays by both special forces and regulars (mainly EOD and anti material), so this weapon choice is chronologically correct although I think this is purely by accident. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:10, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Sigh, RSASSs... At least the weapons in the two flashback missions were close to being right, at most a couple years too early, but these? Really? Of all the guns they could have picked for that scene :P [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:58, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:To give Blops one point, the framing device does add some scope for ridiculous weapons (the action is being recounted by a man who's half dead, dosed up to the eyeballs on drugs and being tortured), though that in turn raises the question of why the interrogator is apparently letting him describe exactly how he shot every single person. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:02, 18 November 2011 (CST)

==EOTech XPS Logo==
There's nothing ridiculous about it, it actually ''is'' that big. [http://webyshops.com/ns/images/EOTech/EOTech-EXPS2-2-Holographic-Sight-2-dot-Ballistic-Reticle-with-3X-Magnifier-and-FTS-Mount-Flipped-View-MPO-III-Pic1.jpg] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:59, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:Actually, there's still something ridiculous about that. :P [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:12, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::How come? It's the same one. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 05:33, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:::Because it's ridiculous in real life too. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:57, 16 November 2011 (CST)

== Minigun ==

Are we sure it's Dillon Aero rather than Garwood Industries' [http://www.garwoodindustries.com/proddetail.php?prod=M-134G M-134G]? I can't find a Dillon with that top-mounted RIS rail, but Garwood's one has it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:44, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:If you go onto YouTube, you can find people shooting Dillon Aero miniguns with rails. It's more of an aftermarket thing, but they are out there. I'm also not sure why you wouldn't be able to find a photo, as 95% of handheld military arms have rails on them. Since the adoption of the M16A3/A4, rails have become pretty much standard on everything that might remotely need a sight. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:45, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::Yeah, I meant I couldn't find a base model on their site with rails. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:06, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:::Oh well you likely won't find one then. What is likely though, is the gun is probably drilled and tapped for the rail and shipped with filler screws, so that whoever receives the gun can add a rail if they want to. It's a pretty common practice on a lot of rifles. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 08:23, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::I wouldn't worry too much about the rail, as it is mounted in the wrong place anyway. Any sight rail I have seen on a minigun has been mounted to the yoke rather than to the gun body itself. Regardless, from the slotted flash suppressor the closest match is a GAU-17/A, which incidentally also has a sight rail. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:47, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::[[File:GAU-17A HH60.jpg|thumb|400px|none|GAU-17/A mounted on an HH-60H Seahawk - 7.62x51mm NATO]]
::::Looking at the screencaps again, just noticed that although it has the barrel assembly of a GAU-17/A it has dome Dillon parts, including the spade grips, the gun drive motor and gun control unit. Also, when you fire the gun, does the character press down with his thumbs, because this is what it looks like in the screenshot. If so, I think that this is incorrect as the fire buttons are on the GCU and the buttons on top of the spade grips can be optionally wired up to activate things like lasers or illuminators, or to deploy flares and chaff. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:16, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Yes. He rests his thumbs together in the middle when not firing, that's "firing" even though you can't see a muzzle flash in that shot. But looking at Dillon's site, the wording implies that those switches can be used for other functions ''or'' as triggers, so it might not be wrong, just weird. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:37, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::::The trigger on these things can be a number of different options. I've seen a butterfly trigger with 2 toggle switches (one for power, the other for rate of fire) and I have seen ones with a power toggle switch and two button triggers, both firing the the weapon but each at different rates of fire. These guns are built to order, so all that's shown on the website is a base model. Extra features can be had when someone orders it.

::::::The rail is next to useless anyway though, because the gun is intended to be walked onto target. You start firing in the general direction, then move the gun onto target by watching the tracers (every 4th or 5th round). This makes red dot sights and most lasers pretty much worthless.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 10:58, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::Well, the rail's always empty in CoD, so they might have actually got something right there. It's just there under the Black theory that adding a RIS rail makes any gun 30% better (the average gun in Black is thus roughly 270% better). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::::::LOL In the shooting community here, rails are super popular among people, but they add weight onto guns REALLY fast. Taking an AR-15 and switching out a normal handguard to a quad rail immediately adds on 8-20 ounces of weight (depending on rail length). Factor in grips, lights, and lasers, it gets heavy way too fast!--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:08, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:::::::::And of course the 37mm flare launcher that you tell everyone is an M203, that's a vital part of every ridiculous range toy. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:18, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::::::::Pah those things are really cool but ridiculously heavy. They are quite a bit of fun at night though!--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:30, 16 November 2011 (CST)
I don't think those top thumb switches can be configured to fire the gun, as don't think there is an "input" into the GCU other than the main power supply. There is one plug I'm not 100% sure about, but when looking at pictures if it is attached it always goes away from the gun, possibly it is the power supply to the ammo booster if fitted but don't know. As for the rail thing, the one time a sight is handy is if you want to fire a warning shot across something, as would be a bit embarrassing to start firing and mince the target accidentally because you judged it slightly wrong. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:37, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:Ok 1st, I don't think anyone on earth would fire a warning shot with a minigun. That just seems stupid beyond belief. Another reason a sight is worthless is because it doesn't take into account windage, lead, and bullet drop, especially if moving. These are all things you have to eyeball in order to make a hit.
:As for those switches, they can. It's all about how the manufacturer sends the gun out and simple electronics. Just like I could wire up all the lights in the house to be turned on with a timer or from my car, but there's just no reason to do so. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:58, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::I am only talking about the Dillon M134D, how other manufacturer set up their fire control group is up to them, but the spade grips here are for a Dillon. The GCU has 1 input and 2 or 3 outputs. Input is main power to the gun, first two outputs are for the motor and the clutch, and the third, if connected, goes away from the gun, my guess to the ammunition booster but not 100%.
::Warning shot from a minigun is not stupid, I have done it a couple of times to discourage fast boats getting a bit too close to where they shouldn't be, and it works pretty damn well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:07, 16 November 2011 (CST)

== Fun fact ==

This screenshot

[[Image:MW3-Magnum-1.jpg|thumb|600px|none|]]

Is actually ''impossible'' to get using Steam's screenshot feature, since it won't take shots during that part of the intro (loading, I guess). In the end I had to use FRAPS. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 13:25, 16 November 2011 (CST)

== Glock 18C/Glock 17 hybrid? ==

I couldn't find a good picture to verify currectly, but even so the developers remembered to add a fire selector switch this time, let's not forget that the really really actual Glock 18C has compensator cuts on both the slider and barrel, in order to reduce the recoil (if I'm not mistaken).

[[Image:MW3-Glock-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Undeterred by this, he's soon using his Glock to blow a Russian patrol boat in half. One-handed, no less.]]

If you open the picture above in a new tab, zoom in and look closely on the slider, there are no compensator cuts. Could this be, still, the same covereted-full-auto-fire Glock 17 model from ''[[Modern Warfare 2]]'', only with a fire selector switch? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 07:41, 17 November 2011 (CST)
:It is a Glock 18 not the 18C. Whoever wrote the "C" was wrong. Real G18C can be seen in [[GRAW]] for example. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:22, 17 November 2011 (CST)
:: +1 for the normal Glock 18. The C stands for compensator, and since it doesn't have one, It won't be a Glock 18C, just a normal Glock 18.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:00, 17 November 2011 (CST)

:::Okay, guys, thanks for answering that :) --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 09:58, 17 November 2011 (CST)

Just noticed, they have put the fire selector on backwards. WTF is wrong with these people, it takes conscious effort to make some of these mistakes. It's like they just mess with stuff for the hell of it. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:09, 17 November 2011 (CST)

:It's a little hard to tell, but it looks like it's on correctly. But as a side note, I wouldn't be surprised if they read these entries and switch stuff last minute just to mess with us lol...
:A side note that I noticed: The Glock 18 has way to little recoil for being uncompensated. The compensator removes about 1/2 the muzzle climb, however for being uncompensated and full auto, it really doesn't seem to have that much recoil.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:29, 17 November 2011 (CST)
::In the above image you can see the "pointer" on the fire selector, which is pointing backwards (If you zoom in you can see part of the circle of the selector above the straight "pointer" part which you wouldn't see if it was pointing forwards correctly). On a real Glock 18 the two positions are both forwards (up for semi down for auto). An easier way to see that it is wrong is in the create a class menu:
::[[File:Weapon g18 large.jpg|thumb|400px|none|]]
::The serrations are in the wrong place due to this, and the selector is too far back as well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 13:06, 17 November 2011 (CST)
Gotchya. I wasn't sure if in the photo it was the pointer or a shadow, but I see it now. Go figure...--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 17:28, 17 November 2011 (CST)

::Also the magazine is shorter than an actual 31/33 round magazine, but it's still too long for a 20 rounder, 19-round mags (17-round Glock mag with a +2 base plate) are flush fitting. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:21, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== HD Screenshots from the MW3 Commercial ==

Here's some screenshots from the MW3 Commercial starring [[Sam Worthington]] and [[Jonah Hill]]:
[[File:MW3Com 01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet ([[Sam Worthington]]) loads up his ACR during the opening battle in New York City.]]
[[File:MW3Com 03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet then switches to his dual Skorpions during the first engagement.]]
[[File:MW3Com 05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in Germany, The n00b aims an RPG-7 at an enemy sniper, as The Vet looks on in disbelief at such a choice.]]
^That one makes me laugh my ass off every time I look at it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:41, 22 November 2011 (CST)
[[File:MW3Com 12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b now shows off the skills he's learned from The Vet.]]

It might be a good idea to give this its own subheading (or even sub-page, there's a lot of weapons in the trailer). Usually we cover guns that appear in trailers and previews, but it's rather unique for a game trailer to have so many real weapons in it, and it'd look weird shoehorning shots from this trailer into the main page's gun entries. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:28, 18 November 2011 (CST)
:Here's some more screenshots from the same commercial. Note that I accidentally uploaded an existing screenshot. The following weapons appear in the commercial: FN SCAR-L, Czech Skorpions, RPG-7, M67 grenade, Barret M82, 9-Bang, M4A1 Carbine, M1911 and its modern variants, AKMS, Remington RSASS, M60E4, M16A2, and the M203 launcher. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 21:56, 18 November 2011 (CST)
::Actually, that "SCAR-L" is an ACR. :\ BTW, I just love this commercial for some reason. =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)
:::Seeing Sam Worthington in it just feels weird, since he's the star of BO. Do you think it was a dig at Treyarch? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:57, 22 November 2011 (CST)
::::Well, the rules on IMFDB state that commercials are not allowed to have their own pages. But maybe these screenshots can have their own section on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 main page as a "trivia special"? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 01:58, 23 November 2011 (CST)
:::::The thing is while commercials are not allowed, ''trailers'' usually are allowed on the main page. I think in this very unusual case this trailer has enough guns to warrant a page of it's own. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:52, 23 November 2011 (CST)
::::::Hmm... that would be nice to see a page about this trailer on here. But then again, we'd probably have other people complaining that it would be our obligation to also include pages for the live action trailer for Call of Duty: Black Ops, the Black Ops Zombies trailer and the Rezurrection expansion pack trailer. Personally I say put all these screenshots on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 page as a "trivia special", and if someone wants to add screenshots from the live action trailers for Black Ops and it's expansions, then I agree on the same deal; putting them on the bottom of the main page as a "trivia special" --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 07:36, 24 November 2011 (CST)
:::::::Naw, if you actually did the gun IDs properly for this trailer it'd be about the same size as the actual page. I think for this a sub-page is probably the best bet. And to be honest, if someone wanted to make the three pages you mention, I'd say the same would apply (and as to complaining, the standard "make it yourself if you want it done so bad" response would be fine). It's not like this is going to be a huge issue with games companies suddenly ''all'' having live action trailers with loads of guns in them. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)

[[Image:MW3Noob-01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b ([[Jonah Hill]]) realizes the mistake he's just made in pulling the pin from his M67 grenade prematurely in the opening battle in New York City.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-02.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet draws his dual Skorpions. Interestingly, there are no holsters for these weapons. So how he keeps them holstered on his back is unknown.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet now stares down at an attacking Mil-24 "Hind" helicopter...]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-04.jpg|thumb|none|600px|...and dodges an incoming missile from the "Hind".]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b charges onto the war-torn New York City streets in typical n00b fashion; spraying from the hip and yelling a war-cry like you're Arnold Schwarzenegger.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-06.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Unfortunately, The n00b forgot about one thing; watch out for hidden landmines!]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-07.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet sneak up on the enemy sniper during the battle in Germany.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-08.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Watch, and learn!" The Vet once again tries to show The n00b how to prepare for combat properly during the battle in Paris.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-09.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b learns what it's like to fight in zero gravity in a recreation of the mission "Turbulence".]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-11.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Take a break big dog, I got this!" The n00b prepares to show that he's proven his worth on the battlefield.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in New York City, The n00b switches from his ACR to his M1911. Smart choice. Not bad for a n00b!]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-13.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b fires his M1911.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-14.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet walk side-by-side on the battlefield, as the trailer's tagline appears on the screen.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Another n00b ([[Dwight Howard]]) comes onto the battlefield, displaying the typical n00b mannerisms.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-16.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b whoops with joy after spraying the battlefield with his M16A2/M203 combo.]]

== I can't be the only one ==

[[image:CODBO-TDIVector.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]

Whenever I look at this image I feel an urgent need to photoshop Bill and Ted in either side of him and add the caption "EXCELLENT!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:34, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Lolz. X) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:23, 19 November 2011 (CST)
Hahaha!! :D Nice one!! - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 00:44, 20 November 2011 (CST)

== Colt License ==
Did Colt have a licensing agreement with MW3, as well because if you look at the charging handle of the CM901, it has the Colt logo printed on it. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 09:49, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:I've got an image of the thanks section from the credits which includes everyone who advertised, I'll post it up when I get home. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::Cool, thanks man. [[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 15:35, 20 November 2011 (CST)

[[Image:MW3-Thanksto-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

"Colt Defense LLC." Oddities include thanking "Desert Eagle" ''and'' Magnum Research, Barrett ''and'' Barrett Rifles, and that they got help from Degroat, a company that refurbishes miniguns; I guess explaining why they're GAU-17/As with Dillon bits. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:31, 21 November 2011 (CST)

:I find it amazing that the developers actually included '''Bobby Kotick''' in the special thanks section. -- Long Fallen 20:25, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::"Thanks for not firing us yet!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:01, 21 November 2011 (CST)

Kevin Smith? The director? [[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 13:43, 21 November 2011 (CST)

== M4A1 20 round magazine ==

I find it funny that they model 30 round magazines on the M16A4, but model 20 round mags on the M4A1 with a 30 round capacity, judging by this picture below, they look like straight 30 round mags instead of curved.
[[Image:MW3-M4-4.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Master Sergeant "Sandman" prepares to throw a magazine to Westbrook at the very start of the game.]]
--[[User:Gunner5|Gunner5]]
:I don't think straight 30 round STANAG magazines exist. However, there were straight 25 round magazine in the early days of the M16 that are about this length, but they are rare as hens' teeth these days and would doubt that is what the developers intended. Think it is more likely that they just modelled it wrong deliberately or accidentally. They probably liked the aesthetic of a straight magazine, but a corect length 20 round would have looked conspicuously short compared to the other rifles in the game. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:10, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::I'm more inclined to say it's an oversized straight magazine than a rare one (it could also be an M4 adapted to use FAMAS F1 mags, if we're being silly). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:19, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:::There ''are'' 30 round straight STANAG magazines out there, however they are extremely rare and also unreliable because the follower tends to hang up with the magazine frame. I have seen '''maybe''' 3 of them in my 16 years of working with guns, including on the internet. The mags in the picture however are too short to be them, and they are most certainly 20 rounders. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:59, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::::If you compare them to the pistol grip they're ''slightly'' too long to be 20 rounders, too, they're sorta halfway. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:04, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Well that's kinda because the grip is at the wrong angle too... lol Go to my page and look at the AR-15 I have up and you'll see that the grip here is angled too far backwards, which may be part of the problem... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 08:15, 22 November 2011 (CST)
::::::Do you have any links to pics of 30 round straight magazines, as have never seen one. I thought the 30 round magazine were always curved, but the original ones had a shallower, constant curve rather than the subsequent ones which are straight inside the magazine well, with a more sever curve underneath. Regardless of the grip angle, the 20 round magazine is too long:
::::::[[File:COD MW3 M4A1 class.jpg|thumb|500px|none|]]
::::::compare to this:
::::::[[File:ColtAR-15A3TacticalCarbine.jpg|thumb|500px|none|]]
::::::It also lacks the M4 profile barrel, and that flash hider is ridiculous, almost looks like a non-gun. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:07, 22 November 2011 (CST)

Ok here is a prototype that I have had on my files for a while.

[[File:30 round straight AR mag.jpg|300px]]

It lacks the cutout for the normal mag catch because it was designed for another gun (can't remember exactly what). Those 30 round straight mags may very well be converted magazines for other mags done before AR mags were widely available. Also, the grip angle looked worse in the in-game photo than the game picture of the gun. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:27, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:Ok upon doing further research here that magazine is actually a FAL magazine. Oops! I can't find any pictures on Gunbroker because once they archive their auctions you can't go back and get the pictures. Grrr... Sorry to let you down guys. Some research I found though was that the curve was given because of reliability issues found back with the original M16, therefore any 30 round straight magazines are going to be collector items and very rare. Just interesting... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:33, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::The grip is probably at least in part due to perspective. The picture Commando posted does look to be a static render of the same in-world gun model that Sandman is carrying, it's just that one's tilted towards us while the one in my pic is tilted away. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:39, 22 November 2011 (CST)

Did anyone notice the gas piston block on top of the receiver? Look at the rear sight, then look forward a millimeter. It's obviously not a removable riser which leads me to the conclusion that it must have been modeled after an M4 with a gas piston operated upper receiver. Hmmm... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:48, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:It's fairly well documented that their primary references are usually Airsoft guns, so it could be anything. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:53, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::I don't think it is based on a piston gun. The raised flat top looks more like it is due to a riser as it looks very "bitty" and slapped on top (looks a bit like the back end of whatever you call those rail systems that clamp onto the flat-top, SIR?). Also, it has a regular handguard slip ring, which I don't think you could have as it wouldn't leave enough room for the piston. The handguard itself is pretty screwed up as well, with 5 large cooling holes along the top, but 7 smaller ones along the bottom, the rail along the bottom is totally flat, and along the side isn't a rail at all, but rather a series of hollow loops much further apart than the ridges on a rail. It looks like a complete frankengun monstrosity. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:14, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::I agree, the riser looks like the rear part of MW2's RIS. And this RIS is the single worst RIS I have EVER seen, in so many ways. Also, it's funny you'd use a picture of an AR-15A3, as that's the "M4A1" in COD4 :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:24, 22 November 2011 (CST)

== Delta Force Weapons ==

Anyone else annoyed at the weapons used by the AI Delta Force members? Besides the issue of the 20 RD mags on the M4s, Delta is one of the most advanced spec ops teams in the world and better funded than most units within the military, but none of the AI's guns have any sort of attachment besides M203s. You'd think that if by now basic infantry in real life has optics on their guns, then an elite team like Delta would have ACOG's or Eotechs on all of their guns in a game set in 2016.--[[User:James Woods|James Woods]] 16:27, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:And Desert Eagles... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:28, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::Also seen in the hands of other SF Units and Russian [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BigBad Big Bads] [http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Desert_Eagle through the series]... It's like, seriously! D:< --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:18, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:I just was researching Delta Force. I saw alot of pictures were operators had just a normal iron sighted M4 with an M203. Literally, only two of the multiple pictures i saw, they had no optics other than an m203.--[[User:Gunner5|Gunner5]]

::As they should. I would, there's nothing wrong with ironsights, it's just nowadays everyone wants a reflex sight on everything. I wouldn't want anything electronic on ''my'' gun. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:20, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:::They probably don't want to be caught out by an EMP again. Seriously though, unless they are trying to keep a low profile by using indigenous weapons, special forces these days would likely have gadgets. Why would they penalise themselves by not giving themselves every possible advantage? To analogise to British SAS, when they are not trying to look like conventional forces, I have seen them using C8s with silencers, AN/PEQ-2s, flashlights, vertical grips, ACOGs, coupled magazines, P226 pistols with crimson trace grips and AN/PVS-21 goggles. I would imagine it vary much depends on the mission though, but I think I have only ever seen iron sights on a British C8 once, and that was on Salisbury plane. All of this is British rather than Delta force though, but I would imagine they would carry the same number of (if not more) gadgets. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:29, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::::That's what back-up iron sights (BIS) are for in addition to your optics. Most people have them in case their battery dies or the optics breaks...or in this case an EMP knocks them out. The D-boys should definitely not just be iron sighting it--[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 23:48, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::::Indeed, where are the laser sights and tactical flashlights? SF firearms look so barebones without them :\
::::At least, vertical forward grips are on. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:18, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:The actual answer to this is a combination of resources (putting scopes on everyone's weapons would be more objects in the game world, this would be especially bad when they're chucking an infinite good guy respawn at an infinite bad guy respawn until the player kills some guys) and gameplay (players who see their teammates with cool-looking guns would hang back and wait for them to get killed so they can snag them). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:56, 23 November 2011 (CST)

Don't most units of Delta use HK 416's, weren't they the first ones to use it too?---P226 19:00, 24 November 2011 (CST)
::I know that the army is switching all of its M4's to use a gas piston conversion kit from HK, but you can't really know what a secretive spec ops unit is using unless someone from it tells you.--[[User:James Woods|James Woods]] 20:01, 24 November 2011 (CST)

== Two USPs ==

First, sorry for my bad english! In Tha name "USP.45 Tactical Suppressed", the "Tactical" part refers to the tacticl knife, NOT the USP Tactical.the normal "USP .45" in the game has a threaded barrel too. Look at the C-A-C icon of USP on codwiki if yu don't believe. The 2 USP sections shuold be merged to become 1. --Paul, bozitojugg3nut's brother

:Good point, though it should still be noted that there are two very different USP textures. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:17, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::No they shouldn't.

::[[Image:MW3-USP-4.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP. Slide wording "(front cocking serration) USP .45 Auto." Has no visible projecting barrel. This is a USP 45, and the model is more or less lifted straight from the previous game.]]

::[[Image:MW3-USPTac-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|USP Tactical model. Slide says "USP Tactical .45 Auto," barrel projects forward of the front of the slide. This is a USP Tactical.]]

::They are two distinct models, not just retextures of one. The confusion arises because the C-A-C image is of the Tactical version, even though it says it isn't (you'll notice the C-A-C icon on CoDwiki also has the Tactical model's underbarrel accessory, not the USP 45's, because it is not the USP 45 model), and because the Tactical version is just called USP 45 except the one time Burns uses it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:00, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:::Does the regular USP also have no bullets in the magazine, whereas the Tactical does? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:33, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::::You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. :D [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:53, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:::::[http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2007/10/09/hk-because-you-suck-and-we-hate-you/ Because we suck. And HK hates us.] xD -- Long Fallen 04:44, 24 November 2011 (CST)

:I think my retarded brother is right this time:
:[[Image:MW3-0000.jpg|thumb|none|400px|]]
:And to respond to the upper image where the pistol is being reloaded on the ship or what that is: it HAS a visible projecting barrel (not on that image tho). I asked my bro to play the level where you run around in a gas mask in Paris. In better lighting conditions, the threaded barrel is perfectly visible on the 1st person model too.
:And for the last, the article says that the USP45 is ''using almost exactly the same model as the previous game''. ''EVERY'' USP in ''EVERY'' COD game has a threaded barrel. Now I am gone to kick Paul's ass for using my account and giving me a bad name (again). - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 10:18, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::You're forgetting that in-world and player-held models are not the same (and can sometimes be entirely seperate weapons as a result). Here's an angle-for-angle comparison of the player models:
::[[Image:MW3-Nottactical.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP. Slide wording "(front cocking serration) USP .45 Auto." Has ''very slightly'' visible projecting barrel (it isn't "perfectly" visible or really visible at all outside taking stills no matter what you do). This is a USP 45, and the model is more or less lifted straight from the previous game.]]
::[[Image:MW3-USPTac-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|USP Tactical model. Slide says "USP Tactical .45 Auto," has ''highly'' visible (and therefore longer) projecting barrel. This is a USP Tactical.]]
::As for being recycled, the USP model is. It also has the same LAM / light (the COD 4 model used a square Mark 23 style LAM, not this diagonal one), the same cocking serration replacing the HK logo, etc. The new one has a longer barrel and correctly calls itself a USP Tactical on the slide, while the original is just a malformed USP. The new model also has different sights (check the rear sight in particular), it's ''not'' just a straight-up retexture of the same model. They are therefore two different guns. The only retexture is Tactical Suppressed, which has an HK logo on the grip when the basic Tactical model doesn't.
::[[Image:Akimbo_usp.jpg|thumb|none|600px|MW2 USPs. Note the same LAM as the MW3 version, same sights, HK logo replaced with a cocking serration, etc.]]
::Let me just break this down:
::*Someone decided they needed a new USP model.
::*They made a new USP model which has features correct for a Tactical, and slide engraving saying it's a Tactical.
::*They decided to use the old MW2 USP model as well for no good reason.
::*They decided to call both the USP 45, also for no good reason.
::Hence, there are two gun models, the old mutant USP and the new Tactical. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:::My bad Tim, you're right. That's what I get for trying to ID guns at 2 in the morning :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:28, 23 November 2011 (CST)

Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

2011-11-25T02:01:00Z

James Woods: /* Delta Force Weapons */

See [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 1]] for older discussions.

== KSG ==

Kinda surprised it never appears in singleplayer since it's supposed to be one of the "gimmick" guns for this game, has anyone seen one anywhere? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:07, 10 November 2011 (CST)

::Right now it's still in production. It was apparently a HUGE hit at the 2011 SHOT Show, however on the downside Kel-Tec is a pretty small manufacturer who happens to make pretty popular products, and that results in some pretty severe backlogging. I think they are planning on releasing it in early 2012 last I heard. The best part though is it's supposedly not going to be that expensive! --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 18:14, 10 November 2011 (CST)

::: This gun is out now! It's going for between $650 and $800 depending on where you shop. I found 6 different places selling it by putting a simple search into Google. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)

I think he meant in the game, but that's good news too!--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 16:22, 18 November 2011 (CST)

:I did. And now I've got one, I get to discover they got literally ''everything'' about it wrong. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:22, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Do tell :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:42, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::: LOL ooooooops! I haven't found the gun in single player, but I didn't do much searching either. But yea it's so messed up in the game (multiplayer). First, it's not a continuous fire shotgun. You get 7, then have to manually switch (not exactly sure how) to the other tube which holds another 7. Second, for being a 12 gauge, the damage is absurdly low. It took me an average of 3 torso hits to kill someone. Also, you would think they would give this shotgun to have slugs in one tube, and buckshot in the other! After all, that was the main idea behind the gun! Instant ammo switching or a lot of ammo in a compact package! AHHHHHHHHHHH!!! Way to ruin an awesome gun!!! --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 17:00, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::::In Survival it's 12 rounds and it's just treated as a standard shotgun; no switching tube mags. It's more or less just a crappier version of the Striker with even less damage and slow pump rather than semi-auto. Everything I've read implies it's 12 in multi too, which as I said on the page would only be true if it were using 3" shells; since it damages like it's using 1 1/2" shells loaded with sand, I'm just writing that up as an error. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:08, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== Mk 14 ==

on the pic Price's Mk 14 has a CTR stock so it is a Mod 1 --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 13:20, 10 November 2011 (CST)

== Soap's M1911 ==
In the pic of his holster, that's not a 1911. Looks like an M9, by the grips and slide safety groove. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:03, 10 November 2011 (CST)

== reload animations ==

A lot of the reloads are still carried from the previous games but what baffles me is there are plenty of guns that have a cocking handle on the left side and even some are the same gun like the MG36 and the G36 but both cock the charging handle from different sides. I was hoping the ACR would changed, but nothing really changed. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:42, 10 November 2011 (CST)

== Beefed up gun sounds ==

I am really liking the beefed up gun shots in this game [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:42, 10 November 2011 (CST)
::Lol... Everything but the ARs have good sounds, and everyone else's gunfire sounds great (ie. your standing next to them). Now I'll admit I'm only about 1/2 way through the ranking so I don't have all of the guns unlocked, so I don't know what some of the later guns sound like. I will say though, the Dragunov gunshot is incredible. I mean like 100% dead on. The L118 is the right sound, BUT NOT LOUD ENOUGH!!! That gunshot should be teeth rattling! The Barrett M107 is the same way; right but not loud enough! I just cope with it by cranking the volume when no one's home :D --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:36, 11 November 2011 (CST)

:::Actually, this was one of the things I really ''didn't'' like in this game, they all sound like they were made on a computer as opposed to being recorded. Think of the M200 in MW2, and a few others, they sound like, well, it's hard to describe, but something like metal hitting against metal? I dunno, but the Desert Eagle's sound in this is very bad compared to COD4 [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:31, 11 November 2011 (CST)

::::That's what I think the Assault Rifles and quite a few LMGs sound like. They finally fixed the pistols and sniper rifle's sounds, but totally messed up the others! What the heck? --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 14:50, 11 November 2011 (CST)

== Overall thoughts on the game ==
To be honest folks, this game turned out really good in the end. The gameplay doesn't feel as noobified like the last game was, the graphics, game engine and gameplay is more sharper and cleaner this time around as opposed to the glitches and bugs in second game, the multiplayer isn't so bland, the SpecOps feel more polished and fun, and the game's story explained a whole lot more stuff to the overall plot than Modern Warfare 2 did, and it left it on a more appropriate closure to the series. All in all, a good game. Maybe it's nothing groundbreaking in the "realism" factor (We'll leave that to Battlefield), but it still turned out to be a damn good game, and definitely worth the price. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 05:42, 11 November 2011 (CST)

::After watching the whole Singleplayer playthrough, and some MP stuff too, I agree. While (to me) it doesn't beat MW1, it sure is better than MW2 and BO. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:31, 11 November 2011 (CST)
:Modern Warfare 3 had the gameplay of Modern Warfare 2, but has more-balanced multiplayer content (though the multiplayer is obviously borrowed from Modern Warfare 2), gameplay, perks, satisfying story with clear parts (unlike Modern Warfare 2, which had a muddled plot), and like everyone said, realistic gun sounds. Even though it is not as successful or good as the older Call of Duty games and the other modern FPS games, it is overall the best video game set during modern times. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 20:33, 11 November 2011 (CST)

:::Well, it being the best modern shooter is your opinion, and I'm certainly not trying to say that it's ''wrong'', but for me MW1 and BF3 both take the that title. I agree with your summary though. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:21, 11 November 2011 (CST)

:We need more MOH up in here.-protoAuthor 18:52, 24 November 2011 (CST)

== MP5K? ==

Is there actually an MP5K in the game, or is this just an MP5A2 that someone misidentified ages ago? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:32, 12 November 2011 (CST)

:No, that is actually an MP5K (you can see the name on the right is "MP5K holographic," and the hold is with the PC's thumb covering more of the rail, implying it's shorter), it was just cut from the final game. It's quite likely that when the dev console codes come out you'll be able to call it up in singleplayer with a "give" cheat. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:45, 12 November 2011 (CST)

::As we all know a lot of things in Call of Duty games are copy-pasted from previous ones, and since what we see of the K looks identical to the MW3 MP5, and we can see the reload animation is copy-pasted from the MW2 K, so I'm betting they copy-pasted the whole gun, changed the model, but didn't change the name til after that video. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:26, 12 November 2011 (CST)
:::This MP5K (if that is what it is, am still not 101% convinced) isn't the one from MW2 as has different rail system and a solid butt. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:40, 12 November 2011 (CST)

::::You misunderstood, the MW3 MP5K we're looking at, and the normal MP5 in MW3 look the same. The game files for the MP5K were brought over from MW2, and it was given a new model and name, but the name hadn't been changed yet as of the video. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:53, 12 November 2011 (CST)

:::::I don't think so, the one labelled as an MP5K looks shorter. Edit: Actually, looking at the Spec-Ops trailer and my own caps you might be right, it's the MW3 MP5 but he's holding it like it's an MP5K because it doesn't have new hand positions yet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 22:35, 12 November 2011 (CST)

== RSASS Secondary Sight on the Wrong Side ==

Has anybody else noticed that the red dot secondary sight is mounted in the wrong (left) side? If your holding the gun as a rightie, than it needs to be on the right side so that the hand holding the pistol grip just has to twist outwards. With it being on the left side, you have to twist your hand inwards to be able to look through the sight, and between a pistol grip in the gut, no stock surface on your shoulder, a magazine getting in the way of your support hand, and a 100% unnatural face angle, it ain't happening. But what else is new. Go figure. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 08:09, 13 November 2011 (CST)

:You'd think you'd just put it on the top or side of the scope, regardless. But the left hold kinda works if you're willing to stick your "wing" right out for it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:16, 13 November 2011 (CST)

::I noticed that too but I just figured they wanted the player to see it. Even though it's wrong, I think it's still cool that they tried it. reminds me of Jerry Miculek doing a 3 gun match.--[[User:Acepeacemaker|Acepeacemaker]] 20:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::That's probably it, and also probably the reason for some other subtle reasons such as the Pechang LMG feeding from the wrong side and so on. I personally know that if I couldn't see it in game, I probably would forget about it. They pretty much dropped realism for gameplay. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 20:25, 20 November 2011 (CST)

== Barrett ==

Price used an M82A1 in Pripyat as the M107 wasn't even developed 15 years before 2011. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:30, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:Oh, whoops. Although a weapon not being invented yet has historically never been a problem for this series, you know. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:43, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::CoughBlackOpsCough..... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:53, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:::OMFG, is that a suppressed RSASS between the two RPG's? In '96? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:34, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::::See? SEE?! [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:42, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:CoD... CoD... -_- --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 09:02, 15 November 2011 (CST)

Also, the helicopter flying past is an Mi-28N (round ball above the rotor), which wasn't delivered until 2006. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:10, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:Exactly. I recently updated CoD4:MW's main page about that issue. But something else I would like to know if in anyway, is it matter if Price used the M82A1 rather than the L96, even though the British Army does using the M82A1? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:24, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::The range involved, you'd be pushing things with just a 7.62. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]]

:::Ah, okay. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:42, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::::Back then a Barrett M82A1 would be the correct weapon for an SAS sniper at long range. Although the M82A1 is still in the British army inventory, The AW50F tends to be favoured nowadays by both special forces and regulars (mainly EOD and anti material), so this weapon choice is chronologically correct although I think this is purely by accident. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:10, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Sigh, RSASSs... At least the weapons in the two flashback missions were close to being right, at most a couple years too early, but these? Really? Of all the guns they could have picked for that scene :P [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:58, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:To give Blops one point, the framing device does add some scope for ridiculous weapons (the action is being recounted by a man who's half dead, dosed up to the eyeballs on drugs and being tortured), though that in turn raises the question of why the interrogator is apparently letting him describe exactly how he shot every single person. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:02, 18 November 2011 (CST)

==EOTech XPS Logo==
There's nothing ridiculous about it, it actually ''is'' that big. [http://webyshops.com/ns/images/EOTech/EOTech-EXPS2-2-Holographic-Sight-2-dot-Ballistic-Reticle-with-3X-Magnifier-and-FTS-Mount-Flipped-View-MPO-III-Pic1.jpg] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:59, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:Actually, there's still something ridiculous about that. :P [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:12, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::How come? It's the same one. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 05:33, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:::Because it's ridiculous in real life too. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:57, 16 November 2011 (CST)

== Minigun ==

Are we sure it's Dillon Aero rather than Garwood Industries' [http://www.garwoodindustries.com/proddetail.php?prod=M-134G M-134G]? I can't find a Dillon with that top-mounted RIS rail, but Garwood's one has it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:44, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:If you go onto YouTube, you can find people shooting Dillon Aero miniguns with rails. It's more of an aftermarket thing, but they are out there. I'm also not sure why you wouldn't be able to find a photo, as 95% of handheld military arms have rails on them. Since the adoption of the M16A3/A4, rails have become pretty much standard on everything that might remotely need a sight. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:45, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::Yeah, I meant I couldn't find a base model on their site with rails. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:06, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:::Oh well you likely won't find one then. What is likely though, is the gun is probably drilled and tapped for the rail and shipped with filler screws, so that whoever receives the gun can add a rail if they want to. It's a pretty common practice on a lot of rifles. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 08:23, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::I wouldn't worry too much about the rail, as it is mounted in the wrong place anyway. Any sight rail I have seen on a minigun has been mounted to the yoke rather than to the gun body itself. Regardless, from the slotted flash suppressor the closest match is a GAU-17/A, which incidentally also has a sight rail. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:47, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::[[File:GAU-17A HH60.jpg|thumb|400px|none|GAU-17/A mounted on an HH-60H Seahawk - 7.62x51mm NATO]]
::::Looking at the screencaps again, just noticed that although it has the barrel assembly of a GAU-17/A it has dome Dillon parts, including the spade grips, the gun drive motor and gun control unit. Also, when you fire the gun, does the character press down with his thumbs, because this is what it looks like in the screenshot. If so, I think that this is incorrect as the fire buttons are on the GCU and the buttons on top of the spade grips can be optionally wired up to activate things like lasers or illuminators, or to deploy flares and chaff. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:16, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Yes. He rests his thumbs together in the middle when not firing, that's "firing" even though you can't see a muzzle flash in that shot. But looking at Dillon's site, the wording implies that those switches can be used for other functions ''or'' as triggers, so it might not be wrong, just weird. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:37, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::::The trigger on these things can be a number of different options. I've seen a butterfly trigger with 2 toggle switches (one for power, the other for rate of fire) and I have seen ones with a power toggle switch and two button triggers, both firing the the weapon but each at different rates of fire. These guns are built to order, so all that's shown on the website is a base model. Extra features can be had when someone orders it.

::::::The rail is next to useless anyway though, because the gun is intended to be walked onto target. You start firing in the general direction, then move the gun onto target by watching the tracers (every 4th or 5th round). This makes red dot sights and most lasers pretty much worthless.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 10:58, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::Well, the rail's always empty in CoD, so they might have actually got something right there. It's just there under the Black theory that adding a RIS rail makes any gun 30% better (the average gun in Black is thus roughly 270% better). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::::::LOL In the shooting community here, rails are super popular among people, but they add weight onto guns REALLY fast. Taking an AR-15 and switching out a normal handguard to a quad rail immediately adds on 8-20 ounces of weight (depending on rail length). Factor in grips, lights, and lasers, it gets heavy way too fast!--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:08, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:::::::::And of course the 37mm flare launcher that you tell everyone is an M203, that's a vital part of every ridiculous range toy. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:18, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::::::::Pah those things are really cool but ridiculously heavy. They are quite a bit of fun at night though!--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:30, 16 November 2011 (CST)
I don't think those top thumb switches can be configured to fire the gun, as don't think there is an "input" into the GCU other than the main power supply. There is one plug I'm not 100% sure about, but when looking at pictures if it is attached it always goes away from the gun, possibly it is the power supply to the ammo booster if fitted but don't know. As for the rail thing, the one time a sight is handy is if you want to fire a warning shot across something, as would be a bit embarrassing to start firing and mince the target accidentally because you judged it slightly wrong. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:37, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:Ok 1st, I don't think anyone on earth would fire a warning shot with a minigun. That just seems stupid beyond belief. Another reason a sight is worthless is because it doesn't take into account windage, lead, and bullet drop, especially if moving. These are all things you have to eyeball in order to make a hit.
:As for those switches, they can. It's all about how the manufacturer sends the gun out and simple electronics. Just like I could wire up all the lights in the house to be turned on with a timer or from my car, but there's just no reason to do so. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:58, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::I am only talking about the Dillon M134D, how other manufacturer set up their fire control group is up to them, but the spade grips here are for a Dillon. The GCU has 1 input and 2 or 3 outputs. Input is main power to the gun, first two outputs are for the motor and the clutch, and the third, if connected, goes away from the gun, my guess to the ammunition booster but not 100%.
::Warning shot from a minigun is not stupid, I have done it a couple of times to discourage fast boats getting a bit too close to where they shouldn't be, and it works pretty damn well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:07, 16 November 2011 (CST)

== Fun fact ==

This screenshot

[[Image:MW3-Magnum-1.jpg|thumb|600px|none|]]

Is actually ''impossible'' to get using Steam's screenshot feature, since it won't take shots during that part of the intro (loading, I guess). In the end I had to use FRAPS. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 13:25, 16 November 2011 (CST)

== Glock 18C/Glock 17 hybrid? ==

I couldn't find a good picture to verify currectly, but even so the developers remembered to add a fire selector switch this time, let's not forget that the really really actual Glock 18C has compensator cuts on both the slider and barrel, in order to reduce the recoil (if I'm not mistaken).

[[Image:MW3-Glock-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Undeterred by this, he's soon using his Glock to blow a Russian patrol boat in half. One-handed, no less.]]

If you open the picture above in a new tab, zoom in and look closely on the slider, there are no compensator cuts. Could this be, still, the same covereted-full-auto-fire Glock 17 model from ''[[Modern Warfare 2]]'', only with a fire selector switch? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 07:41, 17 November 2011 (CST)
:It is a Glock 18 not the 18C. Whoever wrote the "C" was wrong. Real G18C can be seen in [[GRAW]] for example. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:22, 17 November 2011 (CST)
:: +1 for the normal Glock 18. The C stands for compensator, and since it doesn't have one, It won't be a Glock 18C, just a normal Glock 18.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:00, 17 November 2011 (CST)

:::Okay, guys, thanks for answering that :) --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 09:58, 17 November 2011 (CST)

Just noticed, they have put the fire selector on backwards. WTF is wrong with these people, it takes conscious effort to make some of these mistakes. It's like they just mess with stuff for the hell of it. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:09, 17 November 2011 (CST)

:It's a little hard to tell, but it looks like it's on correctly. But as a side note, I wouldn't be surprised if they read these entries and switch stuff last minute just to mess with us lol...
:A side note that I noticed: The Glock 18 has way to little recoil for being uncompensated. The compensator removes about 1/2 the muzzle climb, however for being uncompensated and full auto, it really doesn't seem to have that much recoil.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:29, 17 November 2011 (CST)
::In the above image you can see the "pointer" on the fire selector, which is pointing backwards (If you zoom in you can see part of the circle of the selector above the straight "pointer" part which you wouldn't see if it was pointing forwards correctly). On a real Glock 18 the two positions are both forwards (up for semi down for auto). An easier way to see that it is wrong is in the create a class menu:
::[[File:Weapon g18 large.jpg|thumb|400px|none|]]
::The serrations are in the wrong place due to this, and the selector is too far back as well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 13:06, 17 November 2011 (CST)
Gotchya. I wasn't sure if in the photo it was the pointer or a shadow, but I see it now. Go figure...--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 17:28, 17 November 2011 (CST)

::Also the magazine is shorter than an actual 31/33 round magazine, but it's still too long for a 20 rounder, 19-round mags (17-round Glock mag with a +2 base plate) are flush fitting. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:21, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== HD Screenshots from the MW3 Commercial ==

Here's some screenshots from the MW3 Commercial starring [[Sam Worthington]] and [[Jonah Hill]]:
[[File:MW3Com 01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet ([[Sam Worthington]]) loads up his ACR during the opening battle in New York City.]]
[[File:MW3Com 03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet then switches to his dual Skorpions during the first engagement.]]
[[File:MW3Com 05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in Germany, The n00b aims an RPG-7 at an enemy sniper, as The Vet looks on in disbelief at such a choice.]]
^That one makes me laugh my ass off every time I look at it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:41, 22 November 2011 (CST)
[[File:MW3Com 12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b now shows off the skills he's learned from The Vet.]]

It might be a good idea to give this its own subheading (or even sub-page, there's a lot of weapons in the trailer). Usually we cover guns that appear in trailers and previews, but it's rather unique for a game trailer to have so many real weapons in it, and it'd look weird shoehorning shots from this trailer into the main page's gun entries. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:28, 18 November 2011 (CST)
:Here's some more screenshots from the same commercial. Note that I accidentally uploaded an existing screenshot. The following weapons appear in the commercial: FN SCAR-L, Czech Skorpions, RPG-7, M67 grenade, Barret M82, 9-Bang, M4A1 Carbine, M1911 and its modern variants, AKMS, Remington RSASS, M60E4, M16A2, and the M203 launcher. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 21:56, 18 November 2011 (CST)
::Actually, that "SCAR-L" is an ACR. :\ BTW, I just love this commercial for some reason. =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)
:::Seeing Sam Worthington in it just feels weird, since he's the star of BO. Do you think it was a dig at Treyarch? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:57, 22 November 2011 (CST)
::::Well, the rules on IMFDB state that commercials are not allowed to have their own pages. But maybe these screenshots can have their own section on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 main page as a "trivia special"? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 01:58, 23 November 2011 (CST)
:::::The thing is while commercials are not allowed, ''trailers'' usually are allowed on the main page. I think in this very unusual case this trailer has enough guns to warrant a page of it's own. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:52, 23 November 2011 (CST)
::::::Hmm... that would be nice to see a page about this trailer on here. But then again, we'd probably have other people complaining that it would be our obligation to also include pages for the live action trailer for Call of Duty: Black Ops, the Black Ops Zombies trailer and the Rezurrection expansion pack trailer. Personally I say put all these screenshots on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 page as a "trivia special", and if someone wants to add screenshots from the live action trailers for Black Ops and it's expansions, then I agree on the same deal; putting them on the bottom of the main page as a "trivia special" --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 07:36, 24 November 2011 (CST)
:::::::Naw, if you actually did the gun IDs properly for this trailer it'd be about the same size as the actual page. I think for this a sub-page is probably the best bet. And to be honest, if someone wanted to make the three pages you mention, I'd say the same would apply (and as to complaining, the standard "make it yourself if you want it done so bad" response would be fine). It's not like this is going to be a huge issue with games companies suddenly ''all'' having live action trailers with loads of guns in them. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)

[[Image:MW3Noob-01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b ([[Jonah Hill]]) realizes the mistake he's just made in pulling the pin from his M67 grenade prematurely in the opening battle in New York City.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-02.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet draws his dual Skorpions. Interestingly, there are no holsters for these weapons. So how he keeps them holstered on his back is unknown.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet now stares down at an attacking Mil-24 "Hind" helicopter...]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-04.jpg|thumb|none|600px|...and dodges an incoming missile from the "Hind".]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b charges onto the war-torn New York City streets in typical n00b fashion; spraying from the hip and yelling a war-cry like you're Arnold Schwarzenegger.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-06.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Unfortunately, The n00b forgot about one thing; watch out for hidden landmines!]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-07.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet sneak up on the enemy sniper during the battle in Germany.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-08.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Watch, and learn!" The Vet once again tries to show The n00b how to prepare for combat properly during the battle in Paris.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-09.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b learns what it's like to fight in zero gravity in a recreation of the mission "Turbulence".]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-11.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Take a break big dog, I got this!" The n00b prepares to show that he's proven his worth on the battlefield.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in New York City, The n00b switches from his ACR to his M1911. Smart choice. Not bad for a n00b!]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-13.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b fires his M1911.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-14.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet walk side-by-side on the battlefield, as the trailer's tagline appears on the screen.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Another n00b ([[Dwight Howard]]) comes onto the battlefield, displaying the typical n00b mannerisms.]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-16.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b whoops with joy after spraying the battlefield with his M16A2/M203 combo.]]

== I can't be the only one ==

[[image:CODBO-TDIVector.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]

Whenever I look at this image I feel an urgent need to photoshop Bill and Ted in either side of him and add the caption "EXCELLENT!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:34, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Lolz. X) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:23, 19 November 2011 (CST)
Hahaha!! :D Nice one!! - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 00:44, 20 November 2011 (CST)

== Colt License ==
Did Colt have a licensing agreement with MW3, as well because if you look at the charging handle of the CM901, it has the Colt logo printed on it. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 09:49, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:I've got an image of the thanks section from the credits which includes everyone who advertised, I'll post it up when I get home. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::Cool, thanks man. [[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 15:35, 20 November 2011 (CST)

[[Image:MW3-Thanksto-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

"Colt Defense LLC." Oddities include thanking "Desert Eagle" ''and'' Magnum Research, Barrett ''and'' Barrett Rifles, and that they got help from Degroat, a company that refurbishes miniguns; I guess explaining why they're GAU-17/As with Dillon bits. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:31, 21 November 2011 (CST)

:I find it amazing that the developers actually included '''Bobby Kotick''' in the special thanks section. -- Long Fallen 20:25, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::"Thanks for not firing us yet!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:01, 21 November 2011 (CST)

Kevin Smith? The director? [[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 13:43, 21 November 2011 (CST)

== M4A1 20 round magazine ==

I find it funny that they model 30 round magazines on the M16A4, but model 20 round mags on the M4A1 with a 30 round capacity, judging by this picture below, they look like straight 30 round mags instead of curved.
[[Image:MW3-M4-4.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Master Sergeant "Sandman" prepares to throw a magazine to Westbrook at the very start of the game.]]
--[[User:Gunner5|Gunner5]]
:I don't think straight 30 round STANAG magazines exist. However, there were straight 25 round magazine in the early days of the M16 that are about this length, but they are rare as hens' teeth these days and would doubt that is what the developers intended. Think it is more likely that they just modelled it wrong deliberately or accidentally. They probably liked the aesthetic of a straight magazine, but a corect length 20 round would have looked conspicuously short compared to the other rifles in the game. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:10, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::I'm more inclined to say it's an oversized straight magazine than a rare one (it could also be an M4 adapted to use FAMAS F1 mags, if we're being silly). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:19, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:::There ''are'' 30 round straight STANAG magazines out there, however they are extremely rare and also unreliable because the follower tends to hang up with the magazine frame. I have seen '''maybe''' 3 of them in my 16 years of working with guns, including on the internet. The mags in the picture however are too short to be them, and they are most certainly 20 rounders. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:59, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::::If you compare them to the pistol grip they're ''slightly'' too long to be 20 rounders, too, they're sorta halfway. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:04, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Well that's kinda because the grip is at the wrong angle too... lol Go to my page and look at the AR-15 I have up and you'll see that the grip here is angled too far backwards, which may be part of the problem... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 08:15, 22 November 2011 (CST)
::::::Do you have any links to pics of 30 round straight magazines, as have never seen one. I thought the 30 round magazine were always curved, but the original ones had a shallower, constant curve rather than the subsequent ones which are straight inside the magazine well, with a more sever curve underneath. Regardless of the grip angle, the 20 round magazine is too long:
::::::[[File:COD MW3 M4A1 class.jpg|thumb|500px|none|]]
::::::compare to this:
::::::[[File:ColtAR-15A3TacticalCarbine.jpg|thumb|500px|none|]]
::::::It also lacks the M4 profile barrel, and that flash hider is ridiculous, almost looks like a non-gun. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:07, 22 November 2011 (CST)

Ok here is a prototype that I have had on my files for a while.

[[File:30 round straight AR mag.jpg|300px]]

It lacks the cutout for the normal mag catch because it was designed for another gun (can't remember exactly what). Those 30 round straight mags may very well be converted magazines for other mags done before AR mags were widely available. Also, the grip angle looked worse in the in-game photo than the game picture of the gun. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:27, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:Ok upon doing further research here that magazine is actually a FAL magazine. Oops! I can't find any pictures on Gunbroker because once they archive their auctions you can't go back and get the pictures. Grrr... Sorry to let you down guys. Some research I found though was that the curve was given because of reliability issues found back with the original M16, therefore any 30 round straight magazines are going to be collector items and very rare. Just interesting... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:33, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::The grip is probably at least in part due to perspective. The picture Commando posted does look to be a static render of the same in-world gun model that Sandman is carrying, it's just that one's tilted towards us while the one in my pic is tilted away. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:39, 22 November 2011 (CST)

Did anyone notice the gas piston block on top of the receiver? Look at the rear sight, then look forward a millimeter. It's obviously not a removable riser which leads me to the conclusion that it must have been modeled after an M4 with a gas piston operated upper receiver. Hmmm... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:48, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:It's fairly well documented that their primary references are usually Airsoft guns, so it could be anything. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:53, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::I don't think it is based on a piston gun. The raised flat top looks more like it is due to a riser as it looks very "bitty" and slapped on top (looks a bit like the back end of whatever you call those rail systems that clamp onto the flat-top, SIR?). Also, it has a regular handguard slip ring, which I don't think you could have as it wouldn't leave enough room for the piston. The handguard itself is pretty screwed up as well, with 5 large cooling holes along the top, but 7 smaller ones along the bottom, the rail along the bottom is totally flat, and along the side isn't a rail at all, but rather a series of hollow loops much further apart than the ridges on a rail. It looks like a complete frankengun monstrosity. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:14, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::I agree, the riser looks like the rear part of MW2's RIS. And this RIS is the single worst RIS I have EVER seen, in so many ways. Also, it's funny you'd use a picture of an AR-15A3, as that's the "M4A1" in COD4 :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:24, 22 November 2011 (CST)

== Delta Force Weapons ==

Anyone else annoyed at the weapons used by the AI Delta Force members? Besides the issue of the 20 RD mags on the M4s, Delta is one of the most advanced spec ops teams in the world and better funded than most units within the military, but none of the AI's guns have any sort of attachment besides M203s. You'd think that if by now basic infantry in real life has optics on their guns, then an elite team like Delta would have ACOG's or Eotechs on all of their guns in a game set in 2016.--[[User:James Woods|James Woods]] 16:27, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:And Desert Eagles... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:28, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::Also seen in the hands of other SF Units and Russian [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BigBad Big Bads] [http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Desert_Eagle through the series]... It's like, seriously! D:< --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:18, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:I just was researching Delta Force. I saw alot of pictures were operators had just a normal iron sighted M4 with an M203. Literally, only two of the multiple pictures i saw, they had no optics other than an m203.--[[User:Gunner5|Gunner5]]

::As they should. I would, there's nothing wrong with ironsights, it's just nowadays everyone wants a reflex sight on everything. I wouldn't want anything electronic on ''my'' gun. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:20, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:::They probably don't want to be caught out by an EMP again. Seriously though, unless they are trying to keep a low profile by using indigenous weapons, special forces these days would likely have gadgets. Why would they penalise themselves by not giving themselves every possible advantage? To analogise to British SAS, when they are not trying to look like conventional forces, I have seen them using C8s with silencers, AN/PEQ-2s, flashlights, vertical grips, ACOGs, coupled magazines, P226 pistols with crimson trace grips and AN/PVS-21 goggles. I would imagine it vary much depends on the mission though, but I think I have only ever seen iron sights on a British C8 once, and that was on Salisbury plane. All of this is British rather than Delta force though, but I would imagine they would carry the same number of (if not more) gadgets. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:29, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::::That's what back-up iron sights (BIS) are for in addition to your optics. Most people have them in case their battery dies or the optics breaks...or in this case an EMP knocks them out. The D-boys should definitely not just be iron sighting it--[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 23:48, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::::Indeed, where are the laser sights and tactical flashlights? SF firearms look so barebones without them :\
::::At least, vertical forward grips are on. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:18, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:The actual answer to this is a combination of resources (putting scopes on everyone's weapons would be more objects in the game world, this would be especially bad when they're chucking an infinite good guy respawn at an infinite bad guy respawn until the player kills some guys) and gameplay (players who see their teammates with cool-looking guns would hang back and wait for them to get killed so they can snag them). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:56, 23 November 2011 (CST)

Don't most units of Delta use HK 416's, weren't they the first ones to use it too?---P226 19:00, 24 November 2011 (CST)
::I know that the army is switching all of its M4's to use a gas piston conversion kit from HK, but you can't really know what a secretive spec ops unit is using unless someone tells you.--[[User:James Woods|James Woods]] 20:01, 24 November 2011 (CST)

== Two USPs ==

First, sorry for my bad english! In Tha name "USP.45 Tactical Suppressed", the "Tactical" part refers to the tacticl knife, NOT the USP Tactical.the normal "USP .45" in the game has a threaded barrel too. Look at the C-A-C icon of USP on codwiki if yu don't believe. The 2 USP sections shuold be merged to become 1. --Paul, bozitojugg3nut's brother

:Good point, though it should still be noted that there are two very different USP textures. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:17, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::No they shouldn't.

::[[Image:MW3-USP-4.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP. Slide wording "(front cocking serration) USP .45 Auto." Has no visible projecting barrel. This is a USP 45, and the model is more or less lifted straight from the previous game.]]

::[[Image:MW3-USPTac-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|USP Tactical model. Slide says "USP Tactical .45 Auto," barrel projects forward of the front of the slide. This is a USP Tactical.]]

::They are two distinct models, not just retextures of one. The confusion arises because the C-A-C image is of the Tactical version, even though it says it isn't (you'll notice the C-A-C icon on CoDwiki also has the Tactical model's underbarrel accessory, not the USP 45's, because it is not the USP 45 model), and because the Tactical version is just called USP 45 except the one time Burns uses it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:00, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:::Does the regular USP also have no bullets in the magazine, whereas the Tactical does? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:33, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::::You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. :D [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:53, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:::::[http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2007/10/09/hk-because-you-suck-and-we-hate-you/ Because we suck. And HK hates us.] xD -- Long Fallen 04:44, 24 November 2011 (CST)

:I think my retarded brother is right this time:
:[[Image:MW3-0000.jpg|thumb|none|400px|]]
:And to respond to the upper image where the pistol is being reloaded on the ship or what that is: it HAS a visible projecting barrel (not on that image tho). I asked my bro to play the level where you run around in a gas mask in Paris. In better lighting conditions, the threaded barrel is perfectly visible on the 1st person model too.
:And for the last, the article says that the USP45 is ''using almost exactly the same model as the previous game''. ''EVERY'' USP in ''EVERY'' COD game has a threaded barrel. Now I am gone to kick Paul's ass for using my account and giving me a bad name (again). - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 10:18, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::You're forgetting that in-world and player-held models are not the same (and can sometimes be entirely seperate weapons as a result). Here's an angle-for-angle comparison of the player models:
::[[Image:MW3-Nottactical.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP. Slide wording "(front cocking serration) USP .45 Auto." Has ''very slightly'' visible projecting barrel (it isn't "perfectly" visible or really visible at all outside taking stills no matter what you do). This is a USP 45, and the model is more or less lifted straight from the previous game.]]
::[[Image:MW3-USPTac-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|USP Tactical model. Slide says "USP Tactical .45 Auto," has ''highly'' visible (and therefore longer) projecting barrel. This is a USP Tactical.]]
::As for being recycled, the USP model is. It also has the same LAM / light (the COD 4 model used a square Mark 23 style LAM, not this diagonal one), the same cocking serration replacing the HK logo, etc. The new one has a longer barrel and correctly calls itself a USP Tactical on the slide, while the original is just a malformed USP. The new model also has different sights (check the rear sight in particular), it's ''not'' just a straight-up retexture of the same model. They are therefore two different guns. The only retexture is Tactical Suppressed, which has an HK logo on the grip when the basic Tactical model doesn't.
::[[Image:Akimbo_usp.jpg|thumb|none|600px|MW2 USPs. Note the same LAM as the MW3 version, same sights, HK logo replaced with a cocking serration, etc.]]
::Let me just break this down:
::*Someone decided they needed a new USP model.
::*They made a new USP model which has features correct for a Tactical, and slide engraving saying it's a Tactical.
::*They decided to use the old MW2 USP model as well for no good reason.
::*They decided to call both the USP 45, also for no good reason.
::Hence, there are two gun models, the old mutant USP and the new Tactical. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:::My bad Tim, you're right. That's what I get for trying to ID guns at 2 in the morning :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:28, 23 November 2011 (CST)

User:James Woods

2011-11-22T22:29:04Z

James Woods: Created page with "As a summary, I am still a newb at naming guns, but I can get some of the basic ones. Also, I am a gamer if you couldn't figure that out by now."

As a summary, I am still a newb at naming guns, but I can get some of the basic ones. Also, I am a gamer if you couldn't figure that out by now.

Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

2011-11-22T22:27:20Z

James Woods: /* Delta Force Weapons */ new section

See [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 1]] for older discussions.

== KSG ==

Kinda surprised it never appears in singleplayer since it's supposed to be one of the "gimmick" guns for this game, has anyone seen one anywhere? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:07, 10 November 2011 (CST)

::Right now it's still in production. It was apparently a HUGE hit at the 2011 SHOT Show, however on the downside Kel-Tec is a pretty small manufacturer who happens to make pretty popular products, and that results in some pretty severe backlogging. I think they are planning on releasing it in early 2012 last I heard. The best part though is it's supposedly not going to be that expensive! --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 18:14, 10 November 2011 (CST)

::: This gun is out now! It's going for between $650 and $800 depending on where you shop. I found 6 different places selling it by putting a simple search into Google. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)

I think he meant in the game, but that's good news too!--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 16:22, 18 November 2011 (CST)

:I did. And now I've got one, I get to discover they got literally ''everything'' about it wrong. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:22, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Do tell :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:42, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::: LOL ooooooops! I haven't found the gun in single player, but I didn't do much searching either. But yea it's so messed up in the game (multiplayer). First, it's not a continuous fire shotgun. You get 7, then have to manually switch (not exactly sure how) to the other tube which holds another 7. Second, for being a 12 gauge, the damage is absurdly low. It took me an average of 3 torso hits to kill someone. Also, you would think they would give this shotgun to have slugs in one tube, and buckshot in the other! After all, that was the main idea behind the gun! Instant ammo switching or a lot of ammo in a compact package! AHHHHHHHHHHH!!! Way to ruin an awesome gun!!! --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 17:00, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::::In Survival it's 12 rounds and it's just treated as a standard shotgun; no switching tube mags. It's more or less just a crappier version of the Striker with even less damage and slow pump rather than semi-auto. Everything I've read implies it's 12 in multi too, which as I said on the page would only be true if it were using 3" shells; since it damages like it's using 1 1/2" shells loaded with sand, I'm just writing that up as an error. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:08, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== Mk 14 ==

on the pic Price's Mk 14 has a CTR stock so it is a Mod 1 --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 13:20, 10 November 2011 (CST)

== Soap's M1911 ==
In the pic of his holster, that's not a 1911. Looks like an M9, by the grips and slide safety groove. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:03, 10 November 2011 (CST)

== reload animations ==

A lot of the reloads are still carried from the previous games but what baffles me is there are plenty of guns that have a cocking handle on the left side and even some are the same gun like the MG36 and the G36 but both cock the charging handle from different sides. I was hoping the ACR would changed, but nothing really changed. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:42, 10 November 2011 (CST)

== Beefed up gun sounds ==

I am really liking the beefed up gun shots in this game [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:42, 10 November 2011 (CST)
::Lol... Everything but the ARs have good sounds, and everyone else's gunfire sounds great (ie. your standing next to them). Now I'll admit I'm only about 1/2 way through the ranking so I don't have all of the guns unlocked, so I don't know what some of the later guns sound like. I will say though, the Dragunov gunshot is incredible. I mean like 100% dead on. The L118 is the right sound, BUT NOT LOUD ENOUGH!!! That gunshot should be teeth rattling! The Barrett M107 is the same way; right but not loud enough! I just cope with it by cranking the volume when no one's home :D --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:36, 11 November 2011 (CST)

:::Actually, this was one of the things I really ''didn't'' like in this game, they all sound like they were made on a computer as opposed to being recorded. Think of the M200 in MW2, and a few others, they sound like, well, it's hard to describe, but something like metal hitting against metal? I dunno, but the Desert Eagle's sound in this is very bad compared to COD4 [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:31, 11 November 2011 (CST)

::::That's what I think the Assault Rifles and quite a few LMGs sound like. They finally fixed the pistols and sniper rifle's sounds, but totally messed up the others! What the heck? --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 14:50, 11 November 2011 (CST)

== Overall thoughts on the game ==
To be honest folks, this game turned out really good in the end. The gameplay doesn't feel as noobified like the last game was, the graphics, game engine and gameplay is more sharper and cleaner this time around as opposed to the glitches and bugs in second game, the multiplayer isn't so bland, the SpecOps feel more polished and fun, and the game's story explained a whole lot more stuff to the overall plot than Modern Warfare 2 did, and it left it on a more appropriate closure to the series. All in all, a good game. Maybe it's nothing groundbreaking in the "realism" factor (We'll leave that to Battlefield), but it still turned out to be a damn good game, and definitely worth the price. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 05:42, 11 November 2011 (CST)

::After watching the whole Singleplayer playthrough, and some MP stuff too, I agree. While (to me) it doesn't beat MW1, it sure is better than MW2 and BO. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:31, 11 November 2011 (CST)
:Modern Warfare 3 had the gameplay of Modern Warfare 2, but has more-balanced multiplayer content (though the multiplayer is obviously borrowed from Modern Warfare 2), gameplay, perks, satisfying story with clear parts (unlike Modern Warfare 2, which had a muddled plot), and like everyone said, realistic gun sounds. Even though it is not as successful or good as the older Call of Duty games and the other modern FPS games, it is overall the best video game set during modern times. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 20:33, 11 November 2011 (CST)

:::Well, it being the best modern shooter is your opinion, and I'm certainly not trying to say that it's ''wrong'', but for me MW1 and BF3 both take the that title. I agree with your summary though. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:21, 11 November 2011 (CST)

== MP5K? ==

Is there actually an MP5K in the game, or is this just an MP5A2 that someone misidentified ages ago? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:32, 12 November 2011 (CST)

:No, that is actually an MP5K (you can see the name on the right is "MP5K holographic," and the hold is with the PC's thumb covering more of the rail, implying it's shorter), it was just cut from the final game. It's quite likely that when the dev console codes come out you'll be able to call it up in singleplayer with a "give" cheat. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:45, 12 November 2011 (CST)

::As we all know a lot of things in Call of Duty games are copy-pasted from previous ones, and since what we see of the K looks identical to the MW3 MP5, and we can see the reload animation is copy-pasted from the MW2 K, so I'm betting they copy-pasted the whole gun, changed the model, but didn't change the name til after that video. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:26, 12 November 2011 (CST)
:::This MP5K (if that is what it is, am still not 101% convinced) isn't the one from MW2 as has different rail system and a solid butt. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:40, 12 November 2011 (CST)

::::You misunderstood, the MW3 MP5K we're looking at, and the normal MP5 in MW3 look the same. The game files for the MP5K were brought over from MW2, and it was given a new model and name, but the name hadn't been changed yet as of the video. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:53, 12 November 2011 (CST)

:::::I don't think so, the one labelled as an MP5K looks shorter. Edit: Actually, looking at the Spec-Ops trailer and my own caps you might be right, it's the MW3 MP5 but he's holding it like it's an MP5K because it doesn't have new hand positions yet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 22:35, 12 November 2011 (CST)

== RSASS Secondary Sight on the Wrong Side ==

Has anybody else noticed that the red dot secondary sight is mounted in the wrong (left) side? If your holding the gun as a rightie, than it needs to be on the right side so that the hand holding the pistol grip just has to twist outwards. With it being on the left side, you have to twist your hand inwards to be able to look through the sight, and between a pistol grip in the gut, no stock surface on your shoulder, a magazine getting in the way of your support hand, and a 100% unnatural face angle, it ain't happening. But what else is new. Go figure. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 08:09, 13 November 2011 (CST)

:You'd think you'd just put it on the top or side of the scope, regardless. But the left hold kinda works if you're willing to stick your "wing" right out for it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:16, 13 November 2011 (CST)

::I noticed that too but I just figured they wanted the player to see it. Even though it's wrong, I think it's still cool that they tried it. reminds me of Jerry Miculek doing a 3 gun match.--[[User:Acepeacemaker|Acepeacemaker]] 20:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::That's probably it, and also probably the reason for some other subtle reasons such as the Pechang LMG feeding from the wrong side and so on. I personally know that if I couldn't see it in game, I probably would forget about it. They pretty much dropped realism for gameplay. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 20:25, 20 November 2011 (CST)

== Barrett ==

Price used an M82A1 in Pripyat as the M107 wasn't even developed 15 years before 2011. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:30, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:Oh, whoops. Although a weapon not being invented yet has historically never been a problem for this series, you know. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:43, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::CoughBlackOpsCough..... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:53, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:::OMFG, is that a suppressed RSASS between the two RPG's? In '96? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:34, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::::See? SEE?! [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:42, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:CoD... CoD... -_- --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 09:02, 15 November 2011 (CST)

Also, the helicopter flying past is an Mi-28N (round ball above the rotor), which wasn't delivered until 2006. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:10, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:Exactly. I recently updated CoD4:MW's main page about that issue. But something else I would like to know if in anyway, is it matter if Price used the M82A1 rather than the L96, even though the British Army does using the M82A1? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:24, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::The range involved, you'd be pushing things with just a 7.62. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]]

:::Ah, okay. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:42, 15 November 2011 (CST)

::::Back then a Barrett M82A1 would be the correct weapon for an SAS sniper at long range. Although the M82A1 is still in the British army inventory, The AW50F tends to be favoured nowadays by both special forces and regulars (mainly EOD and anti material), so this weapon choice is chronologically correct although I think this is purely by accident. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:10, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Sigh, RSASSs... At least the weapons in the two flashback missions were close to being right, at most a couple years too early, but these? Really? Of all the guns they could have picked for that scene :P [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:58, 15 November 2011 (CST)

:To give Blops one point, the framing device does add some scope for ridiculous weapons (the action is being recounted by a man who's half dead, dosed up to the eyeballs on drugs and being tortured), though that in turn raises the question of why the interrogator is apparently letting him describe exactly how he shot every single person. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:02, 18 November 2011 (CST)

==EOTech XPS Logo==
There's nothing ridiculous about it, it actually ''is'' that big. [http://webyshops.com/ns/images/EOTech/EOTech-EXPS2-2-Holographic-Sight-2-dot-Ballistic-Reticle-with-3X-Magnifier-and-FTS-Mount-Flipped-View-MPO-III-Pic1.jpg] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:59, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:Actually, there's still something ridiculous about that. :P [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:12, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::How come? It's the same one. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 05:33, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:::Because it's ridiculous in real life too. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:57, 16 November 2011 (CST)

== Minigun ==

Are we sure it's Dillon Aero rather than Garwood Industries' [http://www.garwoodindustries.com/proddetail.php?prod=M-134G M-134G]? I can't find a Dillon with that top-mounted RIS rail, but Garwood's one has it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:44, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:If you go onto YouTube, you can find people shooting Dillon Aero miniguns with rails. It's more of an aftermarket thing, but they are out there. I'm also not sure why you wouldn't be able to find a photo, as 95% of handheld military arms have rails on them. Since the adoption of the M16A3/A4, rails have become pretty much standard on everything that might remotely need a sight. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:45, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::Yeah, I meant I couldn't find a base model on their site with rails. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:06, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:::Oh well you likely won't find one then. What is likely though, is the gun is probably drilled and tapped for the rail and shipped with filler screws, so that whoever receives the gun can add a rail if they want to. It's a pretty common practice on a lot of rifles. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 08:23, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::I wouldn't worry too much about the rail, as it is mounted in the wrong place anyway. Any sight rail I have seen on a minigun has been mounted to the yoke rather than to the gun body itself. Regardless, from the slotted flash suppressor the closest match is a GAU-17/A, which incidentally also has a sight rail. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:47, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::[[File:GAU-17A HH60.jpg|thumb|400px|none|GAU-17/A mounted on an HH-60H Seahawk - 7.62x51mm NATO]]
::::Looking at the screencaps again, just noticed that although it has the barrel assembly of a GAU-17/A it has dome Dillon parts, including the spade grips, the gun drive motor and gun control unit. Also, when you fire the gun, does the character press down with his thumbs, because this is what it looks like in the screenshot. If so, I think that this is incorrect as the fire buttons are on the GCU and the buttons on top of the spade grips can be optionally wired up to activate things like lasers or illuminators, or to deploy flares and chaff. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:16, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Yes. He rests his thumbs together in the middle when not firing, that's "firing" even though you can't see a muzzle flash in that shot. But looking at Dillon's site, the wording implies that those switches can be used for other functions ''or'' as triggers, so it might not be wrong, just weird. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:37, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::::The trigger on these things can be a number of different options. I've seen a butterfly trigger with 2 toggle switches (one for power, the other for rate of fire) and I have seen ones with a power toggle switch and two button triggers, both firing the the weapon but each at different rates of fire. These guns are built to order, so all that's shown on the website is a base model. Extra features can be had when someone orders it.

::::::The rail is next to useless anyway though, because the gun is intended to be walked onto target. You start firing in the general direction, then move the gun onto target by watching the tracers (every 4th or 5th round). This makes red dot sights and most lasers pretty much worthless.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 10:58, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::Well, the rail's always empty in CoD, so they might have actually got something right there. It's just there under the Black theory that adding a RIS rail makes any gun 30% better (the average gun in Black is thus roughly 270% better). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::::::LOL In the shooting community here, rails are super popular among people, but they add weight onto guns REALLY fast. Taking an AR-15 and switching out a normal handguard to a quad rail immediately adds on 8-20 ounces of weight (depending on rail length). Factor in grips, lights, and lasers, it gets heavy way too fast!--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:08, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:::::::::And of course the 37mm flare launcher that you tell everyone is an M203, that's a vital part of every ridiculous range toy. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:18, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::::::::::Pah those things are really cool but ridiculously heavy. They are quite a bit of fun at night though!--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:30, 16 November 2011 (CST)
I don't think those top thumb switches can be configured to fire the gun, as don't think there is an "input" into the GCU other than the main power supply. There is one plug I'm not 100% sure about, but when looking at pictures if it is attached it always goes away from the gun, possibly it is the power supply to the ammo booster if fitted but don't know. As for the rail thing, the one time a sight is handy is if you want to fire a warning shot across something, as would be a bit embarrassing to start firing and mince the target accidentally because you judged it slightly wrong. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:37, 16 November 2011 (CST)
:Ok 1st, I don't think anyone on earth would fire a warning shot with a minigun. That just seems stupid beyond belief. Another reason a sight is worthless is because it doesn't take into account windage, lead, and bullet drop, especially if moving. These are all things you have to eyeball in order to make a hit.
:As for those switches, they can. It's all about how the manufacturer sends the gun out and simple electronics. Just like I could wire up all the lights in the house to be turned on with a timer or from my car, but there's just no reason to do so. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:58, 16 November 2011 (CST)
::I am only talking about the Dillon M134D, how other manufacturer set up their fire control group is up to them, but the spade grips here are for a Dillon. The GCU has 1 input and 2 or 3 outputs. Input is main power to the gun, first two outputs are for the motor and the clutch, and the third, if connected, goes away from the gun, my guess to the ammunition booster but not 100%.
::Warning shot from a minigun is not stupid, I have done it a couple of times to discourage fast boats getting a bit too close to where they shouldn't be, and it works pretty damn well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:07, 16 November 2011 (CST)

== Fun fact ==

This screenshot

[[Image:MW3-Magnum-1.jpg|thumb|600px|none|]]

Is actually ''impossible'' to get using Steam's screenshot feature, since it won't take shots during that part of the intro (loading, I guess). In the end I had to use FRAPS. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 13:25, 16 November 2011 (CST)

== Glock 18C/Glock 17 hybrid? ==

I couldn't find a good picture to verify currectly, but even so the developers remembered to add a fire selector switch this time, let's not forget that the really really actual Glock 18C has compensator cuts on both the slider and barrel, in order to reduce the recoil (if I'm not mistaken).

[[Image:MW3-Glock-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Undeterred by this, he's soon using his Glock to blow a Russian patrol boat in half. One-handed, no less.]]

If you open the picture above in a new tab, zoom in and look closely on the slider, there are no compensator cuts. Could this be, still, the same covereted-full-auto-fire Glock 17 model from ''[[Modern Warfare 2]]'', only with a fire selector switch? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 07:41, 17 November 2011 (CST)
:It is a Glock 18 not the 18C. Whoever wrote the "C" was wrong. Real G18C can be seen in [[GRAW]] for example. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:22, 17 November 2011 (CST)
:: +1 for the normal Glock 18. The C stands for compensator, and since it doesn't have one, It won't be a Glock 18C, just a normal Glock 18.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:00, 17 November 2011 (CST)

:::Okay, guys, thanks for answering that :) --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 09:58, 17 November 2011 (CST)

Just noticed, they have put the fire selector on backwards. WTF is wrong with these people, it takes conscious effort to make some of these mistakes. It's like they just mess with stuff for the hell of it. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:09, 17 November 2011 (CST)

:It's a little hard to tell, but it looks like it's on correctly. But as a side note, I wouldn't be surprised if they read these entries and switch stuff last minute just to mess with us lol...
:A side note that I noticed: The Glock 18 has way to little recoil for being uncompensated. The compensator removes about 1/2 the muzzle climb, however for being uncompensated and full auto, it really doesn't seem to have that much recoil.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:29, 17 November 2011 (CST)
::In the above image you can see the "pointer" on the fire selector, which is pointing backwards (If you zoom in you can see part of the circle of the selector above the straight "pointer" part which you wouldn't see if it was pointing forwards correctly). On a real Glock 18 the two positions are both forwards (up for semi down for auto). An easier way to see that it is wrong is in the create a class menu:
::[[File:Weapon g18 large.jpg|thumb|400px|none|]]
::The serrations are in the wrong place due to this, and the selector is too far back as well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 13:06, 17 November 2011 (CST)
Gotchya. I wasn't sure if in the photo it was the pointer or a shadow, but I see it now. Go figure...--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 17:28, 17 November 2011 (CST)

::Also the magazine is shorter than an actual 31/33 round magazine, but it's still too long for a 20 rounder, 19-round mags (17-round Glock mag with a +2 base plate) are flush fitting. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:21, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== HD Screenshots from the MW3 Commercial ==

Here's some screenshots from the MW3 Commercial starring [[Sam Worthington]] and [[Jonah Hill]]:
[[File:MW3Com 01.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]
[[File:MW3Com 03.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]
[[File:MW3Com 05.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]
^That one makes me laugh my ass off every time I look at it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:41, 22 November 2011 (CST)
[[File:MW3Com 12.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

It might be a good idea to give this its own subheading (or even sub-page, there's a lot of weapons in the trailer). Usually we cover guns that appear in trailers and previews, but it's rather unique for a game trailer to have so many real weapons in it, and it'd look weird shoehorning shots from this trailer into the main page's gun entries. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:28, 18 November 2011 (CST)
:Here's some more screenshots from the same commercial. Note that I accidentally uploaded an existing screenshot. The following weapons appear in the commercial: FN SCAR-L, Czech Skorpions, RPG-7, M67 grenade, Barret M82, 9-Bang, M4A1 Carbine, M1911 and its modern variants, AKMS, Remington RSASS, M60E4, M16A2, and the M203 launcher. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 21:56, 18 November 2011 (CST)
::Actually, that "SCAR-L" is an ACR. :\ BTW, I just love this commercial for some reason. =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)
:::Seeing Sam Worthington in it just feels weird, since he's the star of BO. Do you think it was a dig at Treyarch? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:57, 22 November 2011 (CST)
[[Image:MW3Noob-01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-02.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-04.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-06.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-07.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-08.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-09.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-11.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-13.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-14.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[Image:MW3Noob-16.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]

== I can't be the only one ==

[[image:CODBO-TDIVector.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]

Whenever I look at this image I feel an urgent need to photoshop Bill and Ted in either side of him and add the caption "EXCELLENT!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:34, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Lolz. X) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:23, 19 November 2011 (CST)
Hahaha!! :D Nice one!! - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 00:44, 20 November 2011 (CST)

== Colt License ==
Did Colt have a licensing agreement with MW3, as well because if you look at the charging handle of the CM901, it has the Colt logo printed on it. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 09:49, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:I've got an image of the thanks section from the credits which includes everyone who advertised, I'll post it up when I get home. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::Cool, thanks man. [[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 15:35, 20 November 2011 (CST)

[[Image:MW3-Thanksto-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

"Colt Defense LLC." Oddities include thanking "Desert Eagle" ''and'' Magnum Research, Barrett ''and'' Barrett Rifles, and that they got help from Degroat, a company that refurbishes miniguns; I guess explaining why they're GAU-17/As with Dillon bits. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:31, 21 November 2011 (CST)

:I find it amazing that the developers actually included '''Bobby Kotick''' in the special thanks section. -- Long Fallen 20:25, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::"Thanks for not firing us yet!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:01, 21 November 2011 (CST)

Kevin Smith? The director? [[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 13:43, 21 November 2011 (CST)

== M4A1 20 round magazine ==

I find it funny that they model 30 round magazines on the M16A4, but model 20 round mags on the M4A1 with a 30 round capacity, judging by this picture below, they look like straight 30 round mags instead of curved.
[[Image:MW3-M4-4.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Master Sergeant "Sandman" prepares to throw a magazine to Westbrook at the very start of the game.]]
--[[User:Gunner5|Gunner5]]
:I don't think straight 30 round STANAG magazines exist. However, there were straight 25 round magazine in the early days of the M16 that are about this length, but they are rare as hens' teeth these days and would doubt that is what the developers intended. Think it is more likely that they just modelled it wrong deliberately or accidentally. They probably liked the aesthetic of a straight magazine, but a corect length 20 round would have looked conspicuously short compared to the other rifles in the game. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:10, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::I'm more inclined to say it's an oversized straight magazine than a rare one (it could also be an M4 adapted to use FAMAS F1 mags, if we're being silly). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:19, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:::There ''are'' 30 round straight STANAG magazines out there, however they are extremely rare and also unreliable because the follower tends to hang up with the magazine frame. I have seen '''maybe''' 3 of them in my 16 years of working with guns, including on the internet. The mags in the picture however are too short to be them, and they are most certainly 20 rounders. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:59, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::::If you compare them to the pistol grip they're ''slightly'' too long to be 20 rounders, too, they're sorta halfway. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:04, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Well that's kinda because the grip is at the wrong angle too... lol Go to my page and look at the AR-15 I have up and you'll see that the grip here is angled too far backwards, which may be part of the problem... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 08:15, 22 November 2011 (CST)
::::::Do you have any links to pics of 30 round straight magazines, as have never seen one. I thought the 30 round magazine were always curved, but the original ones had a shallower, constant curve rather than the subsequent ones which are straight inside the magazine well, with a more sever curve underneath. Regardless of the grip angle, the 20 round magazine is too long:
::::::[[File:COD MW3 M4A1 class.jpg|thumb|500px|none|]]
::::::compare to this:
::::::[[File:ColtAR-15A3TacticalCarbine.jpg|thumb|500px|none|]]
::::::It also lacks the M4 profile barrel, and that flash hider is ridiculous, almost looks like a non-gun. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:07, 22 November 2011 (CST)

Ok here is a prototype that I have had on my files for a while.

[[File:30 round straight AR mag.jpg|300px]]

It lacks the cutout for the normal mag catch because it was designed for another gun (can't remember exactly what). Those 30 round straight mags may very well be converted magazines for other mags done before AR mags were widely available. Also, the grip angle looked worse in the in-game photo than the game picture of the gun. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:27, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:Ok upon doing further research here that magazine is actually a FAL magazine. Oops! I can't find any pictures on Gunbroker because once they archive their auctions you can't go back and get the pictures. Grrr... Sorry to let you down guys. Some research I found though was that the curve was given because of reliability issues found back with the original M16, therefore any 30 round straight magazines are going to be collector items and very rare. Just interesting... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:33, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::The grip is probably at least in part due to perspective. The picture Commando posted does look to be a static render of the same in-world gun model that Sandman is carrying, it's just that one's tilted towards us while the one in my pic is tilted away. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:39, 22 November 2011 (CST)

Did anyone notice the gas piston block on top of the receiver? Look at the rear sight, then look forward a millimeter. It's obviously not a removable riser which leads me to the conclusion that it must have been modeled after an M4 with a gas piston operated upper receiver. Hmmm... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 09:48, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:It's fairly well documented that their primary references are usually Airsoft guns, so it could be anything. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:53, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::I don't think it is based on a piston gun. The raised flat top looks more like it is due to a riser as it looks very "bitty" and slapped on top (looks a bit like the back end of whatever you call those rail systems that clamp onto the flat-top, SIR?). Also, it has a regular handguard slip ring, which I don't think you could have as it wouldn't leave enough room for the piston. The handguard itself is pretty screwed up as well, with 5 large cooling holes along the top, but 7 smaller ones along the bottom, the rail along the bottom is totally flat, and along the side isn't a rail at all, but rather a series of hollow loops much further apart than the ridges on a rail. It looks like a complete frankengun monstrosity. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:14, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::I agree, the riser looks like the rear part of MW2's RIS. And this RIS is the single worst RIS I have EVER seen, in so many ways. Also, it's funny you'd use a picture of an AR-15A3, as that's the "M4A1" in COD4 :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:24, 22 November 2011 (CST)

== Delta Force Weapons ==

Anyone else annoyed at the weapons used by the AI Delta Force members? Besides the issue of the 20 RD mags on the M4s, Delta is one of the most advanced spec ops teams in the world and better funded than most units within the military, but none of the AI's guns have any sort of attachment besides M203s. You'd think that if by now basic infantry in real life has optics on their guns, then an elite team like Delta would have ACOG's or Eotechs on all of their guns in a game set in 2016.--[[User:James Woods|James Woods]] 16:27, 22 November 2011 (CST)