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

Talk:Main Page

2012-04-08T06:43:40Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* P226 Beavertail */

''See [[Talk:Main_Page/Archive_1]] for older discussions''

== Team America: World Police ==

I was surprised to see that this 2004 marionet comedy movie does not appear on IMFDB. Would it be against any IMFDB 'rules' if I created such a page? I watched the movie again over the weekend and I was actually pleasantly surprised. Most guns used by the marionets were indeed somewhat fictional but the creators really seem to have been inspired by real-life guns and I'd love to get started on an IMFDB page for this movie. If nobody objects I will get to work on this. Thanks in advance for your feedback, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 15:02, 13 November 2011 (CST)
:I wouldn't think so; due to the scale of the props, I'm not sure that the weapons would actually be based on actual weapons, just "moulds" of them. I've seen the movie, and I think that they are very generic, so I think that making this page would go against the IMFDb rule of actually identifying weapons. --[[User:Jackbel|Jackbel]] 15:09, 13 November 2011 (CST)
::The weapons are pretty faithful to real guns. There is at least a Minimi, M134, M4 with 40mm grenade launcher, MP5K (with the stainless steel Navy suppressor), MP5A3, SKS RPG-7 and a few different varieties of AK-47 (identifiable, such as Norinco Type 56 with pig-sticker bayonet and Romanian AIMS). These are just off the top of my head and from a couple of clips on youtube. Even though the guns obviously aren't real I think it deserves a page, as they are all faithful representation of real guns. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:55, 13 November 2011 (CST)
Thanks for your quick comments, I understand the initial hesitation. However, just check below screenprints and you will see that indeed the makers did their homework, maybe they even checked IMFDB! Commando552's memory serves him right!
[[Image:TeamAmerica-screenshotexample.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]
I agree that the movie contains a lot of nonsense but I am actually tempted to go ahead, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 16:11, 13 November 2011 (CST)
:And It will be deleted just like last time as the "Weapons" are just whatever generic 1/6th scale guns the directors could find. they are obviously not real. The page has been deleted before and will most likely be removed again. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 16:17, 13 November 2011 (CST)
::The guns in anime and video games aren't real either. The guns aren't generic from what I can see, can identify them all (more so than some of the guns on pages like [[Crysis 2]]). If mods so no then fair enough, but I think it should have a page. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:57, 13 November 2011 (CST)
::: I'm with Commando552 on this one, if it's not eligible because the guns aren't real then all video games and anime should be removed because those guns aren't real they're drawings or digital constructs. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 18:38, 13 November 2011 (CST)

== New or original gun names? ==

When a gun was originally sold under one name but has since changed, which name should be used? A good example is that right now there are [[LaRue Tactical OSR]] and [[LaRue Tactical OBR]] pages. They are the exact same rifle (OSR image is the standard rifle while OBR is tricked out, both versions are currently shown on the LaRue website as the OBR), LaRue was just forced to change the name due to a copyright problem. In this kind of case, which name should be used? I would have just checked other pages to see what the norm is, but my mind is currently drawing a blank to other guns that have changed their name but remained otherwise the same. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:52, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:Oops... I was the one who made the [[LaRue Tactical OBR]] page. I sincerely thought they were different guns, one a Battle Rifle and the other a Sniper Rifle. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

== Sortable Tables ==

Zackmann08 had mentioned about modifying our current table format for weapons and actor pages to a version where the boxes are sortable. A sortable template is already made and can be seen on [[Amitabh Bachchan]]'s page (I've now modified it to look a little more like our current table format). This definitely would be beneficial for the gun pages, but I noticed it takes a little bit longer to load and not sure if users will understand what the sortable icon is for. Would like to get thoughts from admins and users on this before a change is completely made. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 22:18, 16 December 2011 (CST)

:You make a good point about users not knowing what the icon is for. It is in use on wikipedia a lot these days so i think a lot of people are familiar with it and worst case scenario, if they're not then the table is just left in it's default sort. Just my 2 cents on the matter...--[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:54, 16 December 2011 (CST)

::It doesn't work with rowspaned tables (like the ones on the [[Heckler & Koch MP5]] page) so it is a one or the other decision. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:28, 17 December 2011 (CST)

:::another very good point, but how many rowspan tables are really in use? Other than the MP5 page i dont recall seing any others, though i havent really been looking for them. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:37, 17 December 2011 (CST)

::::I've used them a few times, but generally only when there are a number of people from the same show/movie using the same weapon, as I think it looks better than having 10 or so entries with the same title and date in a row. If people decide against the rowspaned tables am happy to get rid of them though, was just my preference. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:50, 17 December 2011 (CST)

:::::I feel ya. They are definitely preferable to listing the same thing over and over but if the choice is between that and sortable tables, personally I think the sortable ones are worth losing the rowspan. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:40, 17 December 2011 (CST)

::::::I like the idea of sortable tables, especially for long pages like [[Beretta 92 pistol series#Beretta 92F/FS|Beretta 92F/FS]] or [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]]. However, I have noticed that currently there's a number of page formats depending on the respective contributor. I may not be so experienced with IMFDB like most of you, but it seems to me that it would make more sense to concentrate on developing a way to create a more uniform page format before we spend time on accepting more 'sexy' features. Pretty much like working on a house and spend time on the roof when the foundations have not been properly laid yet. Take care, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:29, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::I totally agree with [[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]]. I think what we really need is a single page that we can look at that has a template for everything. A section showing how to make a gun page. A section for actors, section for TV Shows, a section for Movies. That way we all know that this is the page everything should be based off of. This would be far better than saying "look at the M1911 page" because even pages like that have inconsistencies with formatting. The special page could even be put in the toolbar on the left side of the page under "toolbox". That would be amazingly helpful. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:57, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:Bunni made a template for gun pages: [[Template:Gun]] That's how a newly created gun page should look like. Of course, the gun specifications sections can be expanded with other stuff, like barrel length (if a gun comes with 2 or more different barrels, like the [[Remington MSR]] for example), country of Origin, Designer and Manufacturer (if it is not in the title of the page, e.g. [[9A-91]]).
:And about the sortable tables: I think it is a bad idea. Why would anyone wanna sort a table on an actor page by the notation or character the actor was playing. Sorting by year is the best option IMHO, on both actor and gun pages. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 11:37, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:: I can see why you wouldn't want to sort by notation, and character would basically result in sorting by movie, but I can see how you would want to sort by what guns an actor has used instead of just what year. Also, one of the benefits of the sortable tables is that some of the older pages that are NOT sorted can be fixed by simply changing the class="wikitable" to class="sortable". As for the template, it does need to be expanded but we also need to find a way to make sure people know it's there and that all pages should follow it. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:17, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::This is proving to be a highly educational discussion for me as a rookie IMFDB user. Actually, this is the first time I learn about the template pages, and to be honest I fear I am not the only one. Instead of searching through the website, how about simply displaying links to the template pages everytime somebody clicks the button to create a new page? I am sure this will lead to increased uniformity and substantially lower the barrier for new people to get started on a page. Taking things one step further, how about the following? If somebody indicates to create a brand new page, a question box is displayed asking e.g. to make a choice between movie, actor, gun etc. so that after this choice the relating template pops up? Again, I am not sure if this is feasible but I am quite interested to hear your feedback, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 14:23, 18 December 2011 (CST)

::::I LIKE THIS IDEA!!! We definitely need to make a page that has all the templates listed. Right now its really hard to track down the templates. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 14:52, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:Search for "<nowiki>Category:Templates</nowiki>" and it will show u all the templates. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 15:20, 18 December 2011 (CST)

::That helps but still that page needs to be publicized better. It also needs to be better explained. How are [[A-Team, The]] or [[MacGyver]] templates? When I create a new page, I find a good page and I copy the 'wiki code' from it into my new page and then just edit the text. My guess is this is what most people do and I feel like that is what we need. A page with dummy titles, names and guns for people to copy to a new page and work from. Thanks for letting me know about the Template page though. Didn't know that was there. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:03, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::I think that Zackmann08 is hitting the nail on the head. Building on above comments, how about the following? On the left side of all pages there's the master menu table in blue ('CATEGORIES/SPECIAL/TOOLBOX'). In 'CATEGORIES' one can choose between Movies/Guns/Actors/etc so why not add something simple like 'Templates for New Pages'? If you click that, you'd see just 7 options for new pages; (1) Movie, (2) TV, (3) Anime, (4) Video, (5) Actor, (6) Gun and (7) Others (for whatever else can be 'templated'). Any choice would lead to one single template with dummy info and a short explanation on how to use it. This way an immediate and easy access to the templates will be realized, rather than (I am sorry to say) searching through several menu's in the Toolbox option and finding dozens of random templates. Interested to know what you guys think, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 05:21, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::::This sounds perfect to me! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:41, 19 December 2011 (CST)

:::::So, any volunteers willing and able to start on an addition to "Categories" with "Templates for New pages"? Am not too familiar with such revisions, but do we need authorization from anybody? --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 09:25, 20 December 2011 (CST)

== Merry Christmas! ==

[[Image:IMFDB 2011 Christmas Card.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
--[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 14:22, 22 December 2011 (CST)

HAHAHA! I love it!

Merry Christmas guys :) --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 16:05, 22 December 2011 (CST)

== Gun Brands Pages ==

I had an interesting idea that I was curious what others thought of. I was thinking it might be helpful to have a page that listed all the guns made by a certain company. For example, a "Smith & Wesson" page that would list all the guns that they have. To clarify, it would only list guns that are on this site. As per the rules this is NOT a gun encyclopedia and gun pages are only on this site if they appear in a movie/tv show/etc. I feel that it could be quite helpful in trying to identify weapons. We could divide the pages into Pistols, Revolvers, Shotguns, Rifles, etc. just like a movie page and set it up as a table perhaps with some of the characteristics listed such as caliber(s), barrel length(s), etc. Would could even have a 'notes' column that list certain characteristics that help to identify it (for example for Taurus 92, "distinguished from the Beretta by its frame-mounted safety").

If this is an idea that people think might be useful, and if an admin will give me approval, I would love to create a trial page for one of the smaller companies. (I'd rather not do S&W to start with if it turns out people don't like it). I could perhaps start with Ruger which has a good number of guns. Please share your thoughts! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:07, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:Sounds like an interesting plan. Thing is that quite often I see a gun and I have a general idea what brand it could be but then I find myself flipping through many gunpages in the IMFDB hoping that the gun I am looking for has been properly registered under that brand's name. In the case of e.g. Smith & Wesson (to name but a brand...) I can imagine such a page to be very useful. Will be following this discussion, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:18, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::Yeah it seems like it would be a good idea.--[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 10:32, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Trial page is up and running! I went ahead and did [[Ruger]]. I threw in a gallery as well. I'm not sure whether it's better have it right after the table or to put it at the bottom of the page or what. Please share all your thoughts on the page! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:23, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:I think there is no need for the tables '''and''' galleries. Just simply put the caliber after the gun's name in the gallery. Like: "Ruger LCP - .380 ACP". Sorting gun's by type if definitely good, and seeing the thumbnail of the gun's will really speed up the IDing process (at least for me it will). The whole idea of these pages is great, considering that some guns (mostly Russians) are listed without the manufacturers' names. If more pages like this will spawn, we will need a "Gun Manufacturers" category, or something like that. I definitely support this idea, but the mods will decide. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:58, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::I completely agree. The only thing is that some of these guns have 5+ calibers which could be cumbersome in the Gallery format... It would be great to have a 'Gun Manufacturers' category. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:25, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::I also added the [[Barrett]] & [[FN Herstal]] pages. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 14:26, 23 December 2011 (CST)[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:44, 23 December 2011 (CST)
:::You could put them in table but have the far right column be a picture (put in <nowiki>[[Image:file_name.jpg|200px]]</nowiki>). Would take up more vertical room than a gallery, but you could then include calibre, magazine size (helpfull for identifying different 5/6 shot cylinder revolvers, and differences between double/single stack handguns for example), year introduced (which would also help with ruling stuff out for IDs in older films/TV) etc. I suppose a notes catagory could also ,be usefull, say if a gun is available in multiple finishes and stuff like that. I think these pages are a good idea, but I think having the specifications section is a bit irrelevent for a company, I would just tag it on the end of "About". --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:27, 23 December 2011 (CST)

This is what you mean, Commando?
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-align:left; font-size: 95%"
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="300"|'''Weapon'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Caliber(s)'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="250"|'''Capacity'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Introduced'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Image'''
|-
|[[Remington MSR]]|| .338 Lapua Magnum<br>.338 Norma Magnum<br>.300 Winchester Magnum<br>7.62x51mm NATO || 5, 7, 10|| Late 2000s||[[Image:RemingtonMSR.jpg|200px]]
|-
|[[XM2010|Remington XM2010 ESR]]|| .300 Winchester Magnum || 5|| 2010||[[Image:XM2010.jpg|200px]]
|-
|}
You are right BTW, the year and capacity can help a lot in IDing. [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 15:58, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:THAT LOOKS AWESOME!!! I am sold... That is how I am doing it. Next question, what do we want to do about variants? For example with the [[FN FAL]] do we also list the [[FN LAR]] on the [[FN Herstal]] page or just the [[FN FAL]] and figure if you are trying to identify the gun you will go to the FN FAL page and look at the variants? Same goes for the [[FN SCAR]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:28, 23 December 2011 (CST)
::Yeah, that's what I mean. I think this is more usefull than just a gallery, and also it would be a place where sortable tables would definitely be useful, as you could sort the guns by name or chronologically. For a while I've been meaning to do a table of all the Colt AR-15 variants for my own use, but would be good for the Colt page. AR-15s are kind of a special case as their are so many variants that are very similar at first glance, so would include more columns (like upper/lower receiver type, barrel length and profile, bayonet lug, stuff like that) so someone who didn't know much about different variants could sort the columns and work out what a gun is. Regardless if it ends up going on the Colt page, I'm going to make it and put it on my user page to see how it turns out.
::As for different variants I would list them as they can look noticeably different, as is the case with the FAR and the LAR (these are pretty distinctly different weapons, more of a grey area would be listing different FAL variants such as the 50.00, 50.61 and 50.63). With guns like the SCAR, I think the split should just be between the H and the L, not the different barrel lengths. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:43, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:::Fair enough. The other idea that I had was to add an additional column called "variants". This would be great for weapons like the MP5 which all have the same base. Got the idea from this wikipedia page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Heckler_%26_Koch_products Heckler and Koch]. Glad to see so many people are taking a liking to this idea. I defiantly want to make it happen. Also, the AR-15 idea is a GREAT one. Perhaps a 1911 page as well. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:56, 23 December 2011 (CST)
::::You talking like one page for ALL 1911 variants, or seperate pages for each 1911 company? But then how would we handle, say, an SW1911? Would it be on the S&W page, or the 1911 page? Or both?--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 23:31, 23 December 2011 (CST)
:I've continued working on the three trial pages ([[Ruger]], [[Barrett]] & [[FN Herstal]]). I have noticed that A LOT of these guns are missing the most basic information (no specifications). If anyone is looking for a task, that would be a great one. I will do my part once I get these pages fully up. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:32, 23 December 2011 (CST)
Loving the idea, I am considering making a SIG-Sauer trial page with the basics only, then going back later and adding in lesser known stuff. But I want to see how these pages come along!--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 23:31, 23 December 2011 (CST)

'''Please keep in mind that the mods will decide. DO NOT create additional gun manufacturer pages until an approval comes from them. It will be a waste of time if they delete them later.''' - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 02:26, 24 December 2011 (CST)
::That is why I said wanted to see what happened to these pages first.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 14:19, 24 December 2011 (CST)
:Another thing that would be great, is if anyone wants to go through the trial pages (([[Ruger]], [[Barrett]], [[Heckler & Koch]] & [[FN Herstal]]) and make sure that each weapon has specifications on its page that would be great. As i was creating these pages I noticed that most of the weapons were lacking the most basic specifications and info. (This could be yet another use for these pages!) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:08, 24 December 2011 (CST)

:::We had this discussion in the forum a long time ago, and the consensus was that it was NOT a useful means of classifying weapons on the site. Hence why I deleted the page originally. I'm still not sure it's all that useful. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 08:58, 24 December 2011 (CST)

::::I respectfully disagree. For someone like me who is a still a novice with guns it is exceptionally helpful when identifying weapons. This will be particularly true when it comes to things like the Smith and Wesson revolvers. It is often easy to identify the revolver is a Smith and Wesson but harder to know which model. If there is a single page that list all the Smith and Wesson revolvers it saves us from having to go through page by page. I just find it is so helpful to have one location where you can see a picture and the '''basics''' of the possible weapons. If it is helpful for some of us is it okay to leave these up? I will personally make sure that the pages are done in a professional looking manner and are not sloppily thrown together. I truly believe that (as long as they are done in the proper manner) they can make a fantastic addition to this already awesome website. (ok so that was a bit of kissing up but it's true, this site freaking rocks! :-) ) I'm also using this 'project' as an excuse to update many of these weapons so that their pages are in the correct format with specifications and descriptions.
::::I appreciate that I am still a new guy here and I '''really DO NOT''' want to be that guy who joins and says "nice thing you got going here but you should really change it because I know better." I DO NOT know better, please don't take this in that light. I am merely saying that there are a lot of people who would like to contribute but don't have the knowledge that some of you experts do. I think that this addition would help us novices contribute. I welcome your feedback. Oh, and a Merry Christmas/Happy Chanukah to everyone! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 09:21, 24 December 2011 (CST)

I propose changing 'introduced' to 'produced' and having it be a to and from date. Basically how long the weapon was in productions for. 1995-2005 rather than just 1995 for example. Any thoughts?? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:24, 25 December 2011 (CST)

Would love to hear some feedback from the admins on this project. I would like to continue with it but don't want to do a bunch of work and then have the pages removed. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 09:13, 26 December 2011 (CST)

Looks good. I'm a mod here. I really like the Colt page. The S&W page is going to be an intensive piece of labor for you. I agree with bunni. We need a category for these new pages. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 16:29, 27 December 2011 (CST)

I'm a mod as well and I really like what I'm seeing. This will be a lot of work but I think it will be quite an invaluable resource once it is finished, as long as it is done well. Kudos. - [[User:Speakeasy804|Speakeasy804]] 21:51, 6 January 2012 (CST)

I started the [[SIG-Sauer]] page, and am about 3/4 done. Any help would be appreciated! Oh, and if anyone knows how to change the name of a page I would greatly appreciate for it to be renamed ''SIG-Sauer Inc.''--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 17:33, 16 January 2012 (CST)

:[[SIG-Sauer]] is fine. According to Bunni we are not using "inc" or "LLC" in the page titles. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:34, 16 January 2012 (CST)

::That's fine, I wasn't sure if it was necessary or not.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 20:19, 16 January 2012 (CST)

== Battle Los Angeles ==

I have a question that I cant seem to get a good bead on, in the movie Battle Los Angeles Aaron Eckhart is seen using an m9 Beretta as his pistol,which I know is the main side arm used by US military forces. However, it was my understanding that the Marines used the 1911 as their sidearm and were the only branch to keep it as the main side arm. Eckhart's character in the movie is a grizzled old vet and had just put in for his 20 at the beginning of the movie meaning that he must have joined back in 1990-1991 and it would make sense to me why he would hold on to something like that. Either way please let me know what you got, thanks NavyBoyd
:For movie-specific discussions, please go to [[http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Talk:Battle:_Los_Angeles|the associated talk page]].--[[User:PistolJunkie|PistolJunkie]] 19:57, 23 December 2011 (CST)

== Gun Page Templates ==

As part of the 'Gun Brands Pages' project (see above), I am also trying to make sure that each weapon included has specifications listed on its page. I am using the following as my template. If anyone thinks it is missing anything, please let me know. (Note that I made it a subheading with 3 '=' instead of the normal 2 '=' so that it wouldn't be its own category. normally it would just have 2.) I personally don't feel that Muzzle Velocity or effective range are necessary but I am up for input and critique. Just want to make sure I am doing this right! Merry Christmas everyone!
Oh and under FireModes I am including DA,SA,DAO,DA/SA if applicable. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:38, 25 December 2011 (CST)
<br><br><-- start template-->
===Specifications===
(year - year)

* '''Type:''' Handgun/Revolver/Submachine Gun/Sniper Rifle/etc.

* '''Caliber(s):'''

* '''Weight:''' lb ( kg) (empty)

* '''Length:''' in ( mm)

* '''Barrel length:''' in ( mm)

* '''Capacity:'''

* '''Fire Modes:''' Safe/Semi-Auto/Full-Auto (950rounds/min)

-----
<--end template-->
:Another question that one of the veterans can help me out with. With guns that have Variations ([[Heckler & Koch P2000]] or [[Heckler & Koch USP]] for example), should each subcategory have its own specifications with the different length, capacity, etc. For example should the [[Heckler & Koch P2000]] have just one specifications section for the page or should there be one for the H&K P2000 and one for the H&K P2000SK. (This is the way I did the page but I want to make sure that this is ok. If I'm supposed to just do one section I will gladly correct it.) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:03, 25 December 2011 (CST)

== I can't create a new thread in the forum ==

I logged into the forum and tried to create a new thread, but I get a message that says I don't have permission to access the page. I'm using a different username than I have used before, so is my account "awaiting activation?"--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 11:06, 1 January 2012 (CST)
:I had the same problem a few days ago. You want to talk to [[User:Bunni|Bunni]]. He'll fix it for ya. Happy new year. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:28, 1 January 2012 (CST)
::Thanks for your help. I followed your advice and left a message for Bunni over a week ago but he hasn't yet responded. Has he not been around lately?--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 10:12, 13 January 2012 (CST)

== I think it's time to end the silencer/suppressor debate ==

I see this a lot, people correct other people "It's a suppressor, not a silencer. It doesn't silence the gun" and I think it really needs to stop. Way back in 1910, the first silencer was patented by Hiram Maxim as the '''SILENCER'''. Way back then, they weren't even that good compared to today's because the technology has been advanced on yet they were still called silencers. Them having the name silencer is just a name, after all there is a model of the Ithaca 37 called "Deer Slayer". It's a inanimate object which cannot slay deer. It can be used to kill deer however but the name doesn't fit it unless it operated on it's own to shoot deer. There are some people named Rose or Diamond but they aren't a flower or an expensive jewel. My point is with this is that it's just a name. Even today, the BATFE calls them silencers on the paper work and many companies that make them call them silencers. There is even a company called SilencerCO.

The reason why a lot of people call them suppressor is because in the 1970s the magazine, Soldier of Fortune, started calling them suppressors and giving the reason that I stated in the first sentence. Most people that I've seen that actually own them call them silencers and they have most likely done their research on them.

In conclusion, calling them silencers is not wrong and neither is calling them suppressors. You call them either and you're right. It's when you claim that silencer is the improper term. Silencer is just a name, it's the way it is.
--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 10:20, 9 January 2012 (CST)

: I personally prefer "suppressor", it's a nice, ''woody'', sort of word. --[[User:Milkovich|Milkovich]] [[File:Milkovich Signature.jpg|20px|frameless|link=User:Milkovich|]] 13:51, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:: Yes, "silencer" is a name, but it's a misnomer. "Silencer" suggests absolutely no sound is produced when a shot is fired; "Suppressor" properly states that the sound will be muffled instead of completely silenced. It's the same as saying bullet-resistant instead of bulletproof. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 17:52, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:::I don't see anyone complaining that their shotgun doesn't kill deer on it's own. IT'S A NAME and it's correct. .223 fires a .224 caliber bullet, are you going to complain about that too?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:37, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::::I agree. I think "Suppressor" sounds more accurate and professional. If it were a silencer, there would be little or no sound at all, which unless you use a suppressed .22 with half loads and a plastic bottle, is impossible, and even THAT makes a sound. I say we go with Suppressor.--[[User:Scattergun]]

:::::While "Silencer" is correct in general terms, the term "suppressor" is preferred largely because of the Hollywood concept of the "magic silencer" that literally makes a gunshot into the sound of a kitten sneezing. The "suppressor" term was coined to give a more realistic idea of what the device actually does; it suppresses the sound, it doesn't silence it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:05, 14 January 2012 (CST)

== NCIS: LA gun change? ==

The latest episode of NCIS: LA "Exit Strategy" the guns don't see to be the normal Sig 228s. The guns are still Sigs, but with rails, and Deeks was not carrying his normal Beretta. Deeks' weapon may have been the same S&W used in the episode "Empty Quiver". -Tucker

== Single or Double-Stack 1911? ==

Which is a better 1911 variant to have? A single stack or a double stack magazine. I heard somewhere that a 14-shot 1911 is more prone to jamming but I'm not sure. The reason is I am currently writing a script for an independent movie that me and my class will make and I have access to all kinds of guns, both blank-adapted and Japanese flash cap versions, and the main character is to carry a 1911 .45 and I was wondering what the more professional choice would be to carry.
:Personally I would go for a Kimber Custom II TLE or a Springfield Armoury TRP, both are single stackers. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 12:58, 13 January 2012 (CST)

== Novel guns? ==

I know this may seem like a stupid idea, but should we include guns that feature in books? I have several books in my bookcase that go into great detail about guns, albeit sometimes they call sub-machine guns machine guns for some reason. (Seriously, how can you mix it up?) I'm new here, please go easy, but please give it some thought. They could either be on the book cover or featured in print inside. I know it would be pointless to include a screenshot of the text, but there are some pages on IMFDB that are just lists of guns and pictures of the guns themselves.
Alasdair

:Check out the [[Rules, Standards and Principles]] page. It will help set your straight. Good thing for new users to read (I found this out the hard way just a few weeks ago when I joined). --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:35, 15 January 2012 (CST)

Ah, I see. Thanks. Alasdair.

== Manufacturer Pages ==

With more people starting to work on Manufacturer Pages, I'm working on making a template for the pages ([[Manufacturer Template]]). I am going to add a link to it from the <nowiki>[[Category:Manufacturer]]</nowiki> page. I figure this will help to make sure that they all stay consistent. (Note: not all of the pages that I have already made conform to the standards that I listed on the template, I will be fixing that in the next few days.) My goal is to make sure that these pages look professional and are useful! If anyone, particularly admins, has things that would like to add to the pages or to correct with future pages, please edit the template accordingly. Thanks! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:41, 19 January 2012 (CST)

== Glock Manufacturer's Page ==

I was getting ready to make the Glock page for the new Manufacturers category and ran into a small problem. The new page would ideally be called ''Glock'' but that is already taken by the [[Glock]] page which has all their guns. I definitely think this page would be helpful (at least I know it would I'd find it useful) as it will help you decide whether you are looking at a G17 or a G21. I welcome any and all ideas and suggestions. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 17:54, 19 January 2012 (CST)
:The actual company is trademarked in all capitals as GLOCK so you could do that. Either that or you could put "manufacturer" in brackets after it, or make this the one exception where you put on the crap after the name, in this case "Ges.m.b.H.". If not that, I don't think a manufacturer page is as important for Glocks as other brands, as they are all already on the same page. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:05, 19 January 2012 (CST)
::All good ideas. I'll prolly just go with (manufacturer). I agree that its not as important but it could still be super useful. I think I'm going to add a 'frame' column like we did with the S&W revolvers. This time it will have "Compact" "Standard", "SubCompact", etc.. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 18:29, 19 January 2012 (CST)

== Taurus ==

I am in the process of redoing all the [[Taurus]] gun pages. Giving them all specifications, converting to wiki-table, etc. If there are any Taurus aficionados in the house who are willing and able to fill in the information that I am having trouble finding (mainly production dates), that would be great! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:15, 20 January 2012 (CST)

== Beretta ==

I'm in the process of making the [[Beretta]] page. My understanding is that for Semi-Automatic pistols we DO NOT include "Model" in the page title, [[Beretta 418]] for example. There are a few pages that are not consistent with this pattern. Just want to make sure that they are all named correctly and follow the same rules. Could an admin look into this? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 23:52, 20 January 2012 (CST)

== Proper name for CZ ==

It has been brought to my attention that the new Manufacturer page for [[CZ]] may not be properly named. The full name of the manufacturer is "Česká zbrojovka Uherský Brod". I am hesistant to use this name for a couple reasons. 1) Its kind of a pain to type on a 'standard' keyboard. 2) Most people (I THINK) know the company as "CZ". One possible compromise I'm considering is renaming the page "CZ (Česká zbrojovka Uherský Brod) and having "CZ" redirect there. I would love to hear some thoughts on the matter. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:45, 25 January 2012 (CST)
:I would use the full name with a redirect, but if you are calling it CZUB rather than Česká zbrojovka, that would exclude at least a couple of guns, such as the vz. 24 which was made by Československá zbrojovka Brno. I'm no expert on CZ, but it was my understanding that any words after the "Česká zbrojovka" part were just different factories, or is this wrong? While talking about proper names for gun pages, what should the page be called if the manufacturer has changed its name or merged? For example, when I made the [[Royal Small Arms Factory]] page I used the original name rather than Royal Ordnance. However I was going to make a Denel Land Systems page, which was originally called Lyttleton Engineering Works, but the Denel name is much more commonly known so didn't know what to use. Any suggestions for a general rule on this sort of thing? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:23, 25 January 2012 (CST)
::I think we definitely need a [[CZ]] expert to take a look at this page... Any volunteers??? As for the different names, first and foremost, whatever the page ends up being, there should be redirects form all the others. So for example [[Royal Ordnance]] should redirect to the [[Royal Small Arms Factory]]. Also, whatever the final name of the page ends up being, there should be a short explanation about the fact that it is "Also Known As ______" or "Formally Known As ____". As for a general rule, while I think it would be best to go with what the company is most commonly known as, in the end, that is a matter of opinion. Personally, I think the rule of thumb should be to go with what the company is currently known as (use the company website?) and have other names redirect there. Just my 2 cents on the matter.
::As a side note, while talking about redirect, I'm also trying to set up redirects for these pages that will help newcomers when searching the site. For example, if you search S&W now, instead of getting a page listing all the times that that the letters 'S' and 'W' appear on a page, you are now taken to the [[Smith & Wesson]] page. Just food for thought. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:36, 25 January 2012 (CST)
what exactly do you want to know about the CZ? I grew up in czechoslovakia, we used to carry these handguns in the army.

==A question about a bolt ==

Off-topic, but could anyone ID this bolt? http://www.forgottenweapons.com/mystery-bolt
Thanks, a relatively new and inexperienced user.

==Site Policy On 'Made Up' Weapons==
Could someone please clarify the site's policy on guns fabricated for films and videogames? I've edited articles on the Killzone games in the past only to have the articles taken down altogether because the guns featured aren't real. Now I'd accept that as fair enough, except other articles (e.g. [[Alien: Resurrection]] and [[Perfect Dark]]) deal with non-existent weapons at some length and nobody complains, even though some of the weapons they describe feature far ''less'' in common with real guns than the Killzone games' weapons did; at least many of those featured parts that were readily identifiable as belonging to real-world weapons. By deleting one and sparing the others, you're creating something of a double standard--[[User:Leigh Burne|Leigh Burne]] 09:56, 31 January 2012 (CST)

== Gun Title Template ==

Is there any way to get rid of the '''<nowiki><br clear=all></nowiki>''' that results from using the Gun Title template? I noticed that it can cause some problems when the gun in question has multiple images as there will be a bunch of white space before the list of occurrences. For an example of what I mean look at [[Smith & Wesson Model 610]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:14, 1 February 2012 (CST)

== Gangster Squad ==

Since I can't create a thread in the forum I decided to post this here.

The upcoming movie Gangster Squad will be released this year, and someone managed to record scenes being filmed, then posted the videos on Youtube. A couple of the videos feature shootouts.

This first one shows the "Gangster Squad" involved in a firefight and has a lot of M1 Thompson action:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNlUBrd0uTc&feature=endscreen&NR=1 Gangster Squad 1]

The second video shows what I'm assuming are gangster-types, which is shot too far away to make positive ID's on all the weapons, but I think I know what most of them are. Two of them are using the usual Thompsons, but the guy kneeling between the cars seems to have a Sten, judging by the way he's holding it. There's another guy firing an smg, which due to the way he's holding it and it's rate of fire, I think is either an MP-40 or M-3. It's impossible to tell because he's obscured by a car. I'm pretty sure the guy up in the building is using a Lewis Gun.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xf0iEgtzBw&feature=related Gangster Squad 2]

I love these period crime movies, and this one looks really promising. What I'm seeing in these videos suggests there will be some great shootouts in this movie, and I just hope that's what we actually get in the final cut--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 09:04, 2 February 2012 (CST)

== How do i add upload an image here? ==

I have gun to add, how do i add an image of it?

Also, how do i create a user page for myself?

Sorry if i am in the wrong section. If so, then please guide me to the right section.

:Look to the left; under Toolbox is upload file. To edit your user page, go to the top of the screen, where it has your username, followed by My Talk, My Preferences, ect. Click your username (red means there is nothing there yet).--[[User:Jackbel|Jackbel]] 19:38, 4 February 2012 (CST)

== Fictional Airsoft Guns ==

Just noticed that on the [[Milkor MGL]] page there is an entry for the [[Milkor_MGL#CAW_40mm_Grenade_Launcher|CAW 40mm Grenade Launcher]], an airsoft grenade launcher. It seems random that it is on this page as it is a fictional design that shares basically nothing with the Milkor. Are there many other fictional airsoft variants that appear in stuff (only one I can think of off the top of my head is that weird AKS-74U variant that is in Call of Duty), if so is it worth creating a page for fictional airsoft guns that do not have a real world equivalent? I previously made a similar page for [[Blank Fire Only Guns]] that are not based on any specific live fire weapon, would be like that. Anyone have any thoughts on this? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:56, 7 February 2012 (CST)

- Personally, I think if it resembles the weapon, even if its fictional, it should share the page at the bottom. After all, the Bruni 1911 and the Bruni Python aren't real guns but they share a page with their real world Colt counterparts. At least thats how I feel about it. -[[User:Scattergun]]

:That is different to what I am talking about though. The very reason that the two guns you mentioned are where they are (at the bottom of the live fire equivalent page) rather than on the blank fire page is that they are clearly based on real world guns. The Bruni Olympic 6 however isn't based on any particular real world design and is just a generic revolver, hence it being on the blank fire page. My idea was that airsoft guns that are not based on any particular gun, such as the grenade launcher I mentioned above, could be put on one page for ID and listing purposes. My question really was are there enough "unique", for lack of a better term, airsoft guns around to make a page like this worth it? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:10, 7 February 2012 (CST)

== Naming conventions for SIG guns ==

Now that I have finished the S&W pages, I am moving on to revamping the SIG Sauer pages. I wanted to get feedback, particularly from admins, about the consisten disagreement about SIG vs SIG Sauer vs SIG-Sauer and see if we could come to a consensus. Some of the page have the full '''SIG-Sauer''' in the title ([[SIG-Sauer P220 pistol series]] & [[SIG-Sauer P230]]) while other simply have '''SIG''' ([[SIG P210]] & [[SIG SG 540]]). If for no other reason than to make sure that FUTURE pages are done correctly, which is the proper format? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:49, 9 February 2012 (CST)
:It's not a matter of shorthand, the correct title depends on the firearm in question. The pistols with SIG-Sauer as the title were made by SIG-Sauer Inc., while the ones with SIG as the title were made by SIG independently, not with Sauer. Generally, the older guns (P210 & 510) are made by SIG only or Swiss Arms (which refers to themselves as SIG), while newer guns are SIG-Sauer. What I suppose I'm trying to say is that the titles are accurate as-is. As to whether the admins want SIG-Sauer or SIG Sauer is beyond me, although as they are two companies joined together I'm pretty sure there would be a hyphen.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 22:27, 9 February 2012 (CST)
::OOOOOHHHHHHHHH!! That makes so much more sense.... I never actually realized that SIG and Sauer were 2 separate companies that merged. Thank you SO much for that explanation!
::Given that, disregard my initial question! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 00:17, 10 February 2012 (CST)
:::Having said that, I still think all of the page that say "SIG-Sauer" should get rid of the hyphen and say "SIG Sauer", as this is how both the Swiss/German and American companies spell it. If there is an actual reason for adding in a hyphen then fair enough, but has always seemed a bit random to me. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:17, 10 February 2012 (CST)
Taken directly from the [[SIG-Sauer P220 pistol series]] page: ''NOTE: In the past, some IMFDB users have mis-spelled "SIG-Sauer" as "Sig Sauer". "Sig Sauer" is not the correct spelling; "SIG" is an acronym for Swiss Industrial Society ("Schweizerische Industrie Gesellschaft " in German), and thus, all three letters should be capitalized. Also, it is preferred that IMFDB users put a hyphen between "SIG" and "Sauer".''--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 12:23, 12 February 2012 (CST)
:I've seen the message that putting the hyphen in is the preferred method on imfdb, but I don't understand why this is. As I said, neither the US or swiss/german companies use the hyphen so why do we? If it is a formatting reason or something technical that I don't understand then fair enough, but otherwise I think it should be deleted. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:09, 12 February 2012 (CST)
::I have to agree with Commando here... Both Wikipedia and http://www.sigsauer.com/ list it as '''SIG Sauer'''. Why was the decision made to include the Hyphen here? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:36, 12 February 2012 (CST)

== Television wikitable ==

Up until now I have been using the following table for any pages that I convert from list format to table format:
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-align:left; font-size: 95%"
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="250"|'''Show Title / Episode'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Actor'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Character'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Note'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Air Date'''
|-
| ''[[CSI: Miami]]'' / "Down to the Wire" || [[Tom Sizemore]] || Private Investigator Kurt Rossi || || 2002 - Present
|-
|}
I was considering modifying this to give '''Episode''' its own column. I wanted to see what people thought of this idea...
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-align:left; font-size: 95%"
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Show Title'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Episode(s)'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Actor'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Character'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Note'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Air Date'''
|-
| ''[[CSI: Miami]]'' || "Down to the Wire" || [[Tom Sizemore]] || Private Investigator Kurt Rossi || || 2002 - Present
|-
|}
Any feedback is appreciated. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 01:26, 11 February 2012 (CST)
:I've been combining the episode and note columns. I think I picked that up from Ben. That always made sense for me because episode info or notes are sometimes missing or unnecessary, while Show Title is ALWAYS present. I've always tried to supply episode info, and it could get a little tight when it's in there with the show name. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 01:42, 11 February 2012 (CST)

== Sako vs SAKO ==

I want to come to another consensus here... Is it SAKO or Sako? I.E. [[SAKO 85 Hunter]] vs [[Sako TRG-21]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:40, 11 February 2012 (CST)
:It's an acronym (Suojeluskuntain Ase- ja Konepaja Oy), which would suggest all caps. If you go to the US website, the page is titled "SAKO Finland." Strangely enough, if you go to the "Company" link, they refer to themselves as just "Sako." --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 15:36, 11 February 2012 (CST)

== Companies w/ one single product ==

I have always wondered, what about those companies that have only one single product, like AMSD, Rafael, DRS Precisions,... (I am sure there is more) Can they have a Manufacturer page or not? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 06:53, 12 February 2012 (CST)
:Can they? Yes... Should they? No... Just my humble opinion... --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:49, 12 February 2012 (CST)

== Featured Articles ==

Question for our admins regarding the featured articles on the main page. What is the process for becoming a featured article? I know that for obvious reasons (preventing vandalism, etc.) the [[Template:FeaturedArticle2]] is locked, but is there a way for us non-admins to suggest new articles? Could we perhaps set something up whereby non-admins could post an addition in the discussion page for [[Template:FeaturedArticle2]] and if an admin approves of the addition, it could then be added into the mix? I really do love the random articles that pop up on the front page but as a very frequent visitor, seeing the same images over and over starts to get a little boring... Even just changing the images for a given "Featured Article" would be nice. For example, keeping [[The Unit]] (one of the best articles on the site) as a featured article but choosing 2 different images to be displayed. Any thoughts? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:34, 13 February 2012 (CST)

== Wannabe Indie game dev has some questions ==

I'm looking into making a simple target range simulator, most likely in a software like Unity3d or Coppercube which i have experience in. I am however unsure if entire realism is a good or possibly bad move, not only for game-play, but also because I feel it wouldn't have that... special feeling of a video game, when you play a role playing game for example, they all have their own mood. Pokemon is not Final Fantasy is not The Elder Scrolls. My main concern is how all target range simulator's I've played always go graphics realism, but the shooting mechanics tend to be surreal. This makes it not very fun for many people, people who like goals in their games get to set high scores, but not much else. People who possess firearm knowledge are easily ticked off by the fact that it is trying to be real, but lacks true realism due to all sorts of game-play errors. So while this may seem far fetched, my idea is simple. Mix a realistic (game-play) target range with surreal and almost child-like simple 3d graphics and a basic plot. For those familiar with the concepts in Pokemon, the player character has two primary goals, to collect info on all the monsters, and to defeat all the gym leaders and then the elite four. Target ranges would be like gyms, each has people who you can challenge to accuracy, fastest shot, and other contests of skill. While traveling from range to range, you can collect more firearms, not in grass, but from vendors and helping people with small side-quests, etc. I doubt this kind of a game would receive much, if any audience, particularly being that it's too serious and gun-friendly in content for most children (or more specifically, their parents) to buy, and it's far too childish in graphics for Adults. It's a happy middle where it's a game i would personally love to play, and hopefully so would a few others out there somewhere. All in all, I think a target range and competition based collection RPG with a heavy emphasis on gameplay and fun while still maintaining key aspects of gun culture would be a unique game. (things like policing your brass to be reused with powder and appropriate caliber bullets as a cheaper way to procure and load ammunition, maybe even allowing you to tweak the amount of powder that way). It's hard to explain the whole concept as I haven't nailed every little thing down yet. I was planning on starting the project on a smaller scale, then slowly adding more. So is this a good idea or am i barking up the wrong tree? I'd love to do full realism, but I honestly want the game to be atleast partially fun or stylized. (I am not looking for help making this game, I merely want feedback on the ideas) (I also hope I did not break anything by posting this, I am unfamiliar with wiki editing, and I am relying on your guides.) --[[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 12:31, 18 February 2012 (CST)

:First thing: please post "I am not a bot" after this message before you post anything else on this wiki. Your message seems a little...out of place, and I want to check it's not automated spam. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:44, 18 February 2012 (CST)

::Not a bot, Sorry for any confusion based on the ludicrous idea and my unusual name choice. I couldn't find any other place where i could... Oh. you have a forum. How did i miss that? Sorry. Seems so obvious now that it's glaring at me on the left. And now I forgot to sign. --[[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 14:07, 18 February 2012 (CST)

::Email confirmed on forums, but now Posting Rules: You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts... Whaaa? --[[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 14:12, 18 February 2012 (CST)

:::Unfortunately the automatic approvals don't work for some reason, you'll need to leave a message on [[User:Bunni]]'s talk page to get approved. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:06, 23 February 2012 (CST)

== Top Shot ==

For all you [[Top Shot]] fans, we have a new viewer of IMFDB. I just got re-tweeted by Colby Donaldson... He's checking out the page. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 21:16, 22 February 2012 (CST)
:Haha, that's great!--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 21:18, 22 February 2012 (CST)

== SOCOM 4 ==
Anyone agree it would would a great idea to add Socom 4 with the other SOCOM games in the video game category?--[[User:Commandoninja137|Commandoninja137]] 21:28, 23 February 2012 (CST)

== CSI ==

I am in the process of trying to redo the [[CSI]] pages. There are a LOT of guns used in these series. I feel like they deserve as much attention as the [[NCIS]] pages which are awesome at the moment. If anyone has any of the seasons on DVD and is interested in helping that would be awesome. I just finished [[CSI: NY - Season 7]] and am preparing to do season 6. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:46, 24 February 2012 (CST)

== New "Current" template ==

So we already have a number of awesome templates for labeling pages. The '''Upcoming''' template for stuff that hasn't been released yet. The '''Work in Progress''' template for pages that someone is currently working on. Anyone have any thoughts on making a new template for pages that are currently being updated? For example, the current season of [[NCIS]] or the current season of [[Hawaii Five-0]]. There not exactly "upcoming" because the upcoming template specifically says "all images are from trailers" and they aren't exactly a work in progress... Just a thought. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:20, 29 February 2012 (CST)

== New category: "Containing Unidentified Firearm"? ==

I was just wondering if it would make sense to create a new category "Containing Unidentified Firearm" for movies that contain a gun that cannot be identified by the page creator. This way, anybody (like me...) who gets a kick out of identifying a gun that other people could not, can very efficiently assist others to complete pages. If you guys think it's a good idea, any suggestions how to create/promote this category? Thanks for any comments, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 15:43, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:I was thinking about that just last night... I think its a GREAT idea! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:32, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
::Great! Could you advise on the following; (1) what would be a good name? (2) how to create that category? and (3) how can I get other users to start using the category? Look forward to hear from you, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 16:49, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:::I would advise talking to a few admins before doing anything else. We wanna get feedback from them before proceeding. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 17:38, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
::::A good name for this category might be "Movies with unidentified guns" or "Featuring unknown weapons" or something like that. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 19:16, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:::::I agree that something like this would be a good idea. Something to bear in mind though, there are a lot of pages with unidentified guns on this site, most of the time because they are only seen partially, briefly, from a distance or in poor lighting, or just due to the fact that they may be "generic" looking (I bet there are a hell of a lot of pages on here that say "unidentified revolver"). With most of these guns it will be impossible to get a firm ID so the tag will remain there forever, meaning that if someone wanted to try and be helpful and ID a few guns 99% of them would be a vaguely pistol shaped shadow (if it was a chronological list this would be less of a problem but categories are alphabetised). I think a better solution might be to have a discussion page somewhere where people can post caps of unidentified guns they have found whilst building pages, adding the new unidentified gun at the top of the page. This way you would be able to periodically purge the guns that are unidentifiable (e.g. speck in the distance) and would allow discussion between people to help ID the guns. I think it would also be a more successful way of getting unknown guns identified, as if you are good at IDing guns you can just watch this hypothetical page and see whenever a new unidentified gun crops up, as opposed to with a category where you don't know (as for as I know) when something has been added to it. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 20:37, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
Commando makes a good point. I propose a middle ground. There is a difference between "'''I''' cannot identify this gun" and "this gun cannot be identified". A gun that is only seen for a split second may not be identifiable and may simply be called an "unknown" revolver/pistol/etc. Pages that have those types of guns would NOT fall under this category. On the other hand, if you are working on a page and dont know what some of the guns are, you can add the tag and that will be a clue to some of our more experienced members to swoop in and help out. I'm in the process of capping all 20+ seasons of the 3 [[CSI]]s and there are a LOT of guns (particularly revolvers) that I can't identify but from time to time senior members come in and identify them. It would be great to tag these pages until either a) all guns are identified or b) a determination is made that 1 or more guns simply cannot be identified from the images provided. Basically I look at this as a variation of the WorkInProcess template. The page is done, all guns are uploaded, but not everything has been identified. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:56, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:Check out the template... [[Template:Unidentified]] --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 21:44, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
::As long as it was only used for guns that could be identified if you knew what they were rather than guns you don't see properly it would probably be helpful. Still, would be nice if there was some way of doing it chronologically so you could see when a new thing with unidentified guns is added. Just throwing it out there, here is another possible image to use for the unidentified guns template. I think it looks more like a question mark and is actually made from real weapons (a Korobov TKB-022 and a No. 74 sticky bomb). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:06, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
::[[File:Question mark 2.jpg|thumb|50px|none|]]
:::AWWW but i spent so much time making that quesiton mark just right!!! Grrr... Yorus is better tho... :-p --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:29, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
I like the idea and the templates, but rather than make it too complicated trying to get the question mark perfect, what if we just put a gun overlaying a simple, perfectly recognizable question mark. I like the idea of making the gun into a question mark, but I really have to look in order to see it on those. If I had any idea how to make one, I would.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 15:59, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
:I don't mind if the question mark gun thing isn't used, in fact a regular blacked out background photo of a gun would be better as would be more in keeping with the other templates, but what is the perfect "unknown" gun that the majority of people cannot identify? [http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:Gun_Cylon_stunt.jpg This]? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:02, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
::We could use something like that, or what about a blurry outline of a gun in front of a question mark? I think that the question mark makes the template identifiable, rather than just the words 'Unidentified Firearm' across the middle.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 18:02, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
:::I like [[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]]'s idea. We definatly want to keep the question mark up there. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:05, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
::::Since the majority of unidentified guns I've seen are revolvers, why not make it a S&W Model 27 or a Colt Official Police (or some other revolver... I dislike the idea of using a weird gun for some reason). Maybe make it a Vz 58? It looks like an AK to the untrained eye, and would be mistaken for such if not for the people on this website. Inside joke, huh? [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 19:24, 13 March 2012 (CDT)
::::Thanks for all your input, what a short post from me a week ago can cause hahaha I like the 'Unidentified' logo and I have put it on top all movies where somebody else may be able to identify a gun I could not, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 13:19, 18 March 2012 (CDT)

== Infoboxes. ==

I am interested in trying to get the [[Template:Infobox Movie|Movie Infobox]] more widely used on the site. I think that ''if it is done well'' it could be very useful on the pages. One of the best features of wikipedia (IMHO) is the infoboxes which give you the basic information at a glace without needing to search the page. I would love some input from people, particularly the admins, regarding how best to make these infoboxes better. I want to make sure that the information they list is useful and valid, not just text filler and puff. Post your thoughts! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:51, 16 March 2012 (CDT)

== The idea to change the page ==

The idea to change the page. An example of the new page. The rest of the site will have a basic table.

{| align="center" style="text-align:center"
!align="center"|<div style=font-size:300%>MP40 Gallery</div><br>
|-
|<div style="text-align=center">

<gallery widths=450px perrow=2>
Image:MP40.jpg|MP40 - 9x19mm
Image:MP40Side.jpg|MP40 submachine gun - 9x19mm
</gallery></div>
|-
|}
=== Specifications ===

{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-
<div style="text-align=center">
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Category'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="650"|'''Data'''
|-
|'''Place of origin || Nazi Germany
|-
|'''Production''' || 1940 - 1944
|-
|'''Manufacturer''' || [[Erma Werke]]
|-
|'''Caliber''' || 9mm
|-
|'''Cartridge''' || 9x19mm Parabellum
|-
|'''Weight''' || 4 kg (8.82 lb)
|-
|'''Length''' || 833 mm (32.8 in) stock extended / 630 mm (24.8 in) stock folded
|-
|'''Barrel length''' || 251 mm (9.9 in)
|-
|'''Rate of fire''' || 500 rounds/min
|-
|'''Effective range''' || 70 m
|-
|'''Feed system''' || 32-round detachable box magazine / 64-round with dual magazines
|}

Do you like someone, such a proposal? It should be applied to each side of the gun?--[[User:Mateogala|Mateogala]] 14:51, 21 March 2012 (CDT)

This is an example of the new layout. It is more clear and transparent. You can change the way every weapon in the service. >>[[MG81]]<< How do you like it? --[[User:Mateogala|Mateogala]] 16:03, 21 March 2012 (CDT)

:This new format has not been approved and please change your entry in the [[MG81]] into the correct format already established. Please place your suggestion for a change in the [[Talk:MG81|MG81 Discussion]] page. Unfortunately this table is too big and would make the gun pages too cluttered. We also have many different pictures of guns that don't have both sides photographed. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 19:06, 21 March 2012 (CDT)

== New idea to help identify guns ==

So a while ago I started the Manufacturer pages as a way to help identify guns. I had another idea that I wanted to try on for size with people. Recently, I was working on [[CSI: Miami - Season 9]] and came across a submachine gun that I didn't recognize. I immediately went to the [[:Category: Submachine Gun]] page but was forced to go through every link trying to find the one that I was looking for.

What do you guys think of adding a gallery of some sort to the Category pages that shows the BASIC models of the guns included? When I say basic I mean that we wouldn't need an image of the MAC-10, MAC-11 and Cobray M11/9. Seeing the basic MAC-10 would be enough to direct you to the MAC-10 page where you can figure out whether the gun you are looking at is in fact a MAC-10 or one of the other variants. Similarly, an image of any one of the MP5s would suffice, we wouldn't need images of each of the variants.

If I can get the okay from at least one admin, I would love to try this out on the [[:Category: Submachine Gun]] page and see what you all think. :-)
(Note that I also posted this in the forum).

--[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 18:19, 17 March 2012 (CDT)

:YOU MUST IMPLEMENT THIS ON ALL THE WEAPON CATEGORY PAGES. Sorry about the caps lock, this is just such an awesome idea, and it turned out so well on the submachine gun page. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 18:40, 18 March 2012 (CDT)

::HAHAHAHA!!!! I'm glad you liked it. Give a few days, lets get some more reaction but I agree with you, particularly since it doesn't involve creating a new page, its just taking advantage of a page that already exist. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 18:43, 18 March 2012 (CDT)

Another thing that could reduce the time looking at gun images is the creation of new gun categories, like "Pocket Pistol", "Light Machine Gun", "Civilian Rifle", "IAR" and stuff like this. This could help filter the guns more. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 18:02, 19 March 2012 (CDT)
:I like that idea. Take a look at how I did the [[Sniper Rifles]] page. I split it up by Bolt Action, Semi-Auto and other. I was thinking of doing the same thing when I do the files section with an additional category for Lever action. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 18:33, 19 March 2012 (CDT)

One thing that I am defiantly going to need help with is making sure that these tables stay updated. If and when new guns are added to the site, we need to make sure that they get added to the appropriate tables. If you guys can help me keep an eye on the "Recently Added Pages" section that would be great! Also, I just finished the [[Shotguns]] section. I wasn't sure what to do about the [[12 Gauge Double Barreled Shotgun]]s page so for now I just left it out of the gallery. Input is welcome! :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:04, 20 March 2012 (CDT)
:Maybe you should add a "Dual-Mode" section to the list and place the SPAS-12, SPAS-15, and Benelli M3 there. (Or list them in both pump and semi sections) And semi-auto and full-auto SGs should be separated. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:18, 20 March 2012 (CDT)

::Don't want to over complicate things by adding more categories than are necessary. I did put the SPAS-12 in both but I didnt realized that the SPAS-15 and Benelli M3 also fit under both sections. As for the Submachine Guns, there aren't many that are semi-auto only so let's keep them all together. Plus, that is not a main identifying feature since many "Semi-Auto Only" guns are converted for a movie. The point is to help identify the guns. The fact that a shotgun is Pump-Action vs Semi-Auto is very obvious during a movie and will help in identifying the gun. Also, with the exception of dual mode shotguns such as the SPAS-12, these guns can't be converted (at least not the same way an armorer can convert a semi-auto gun to full-auto). In other words, you will never see a semi-auto [[Ithaca 37]] but you could see a full-auto [[Steyr SPP]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:00, 20 March 2012 (CDT)

I'm in the process of working on the handguns section. I am going to need a LOT of feedback on this and will warn you ahead of time that it is going to be VERY cluttered when it is first uploaded. I think I am up to 5 categories at the moment: Compact, Standard, Long, Target and Other. I may split the "compact" into Pocket and Compact but we'll see what it looks like when I'm done. I'm just doing the code in notepad for the moment so that I can upload it in one move instead of in drips and drabs. Keep the feedback coming! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:27, 22 March 2012 (CDT)
:Just completed the [[pistols]] page. I would love some help checking it. I'm sure there are AT LEAST a few typos. I'm sure i mislabeled an image or something so any help is welcome! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:21, 22 March 2012 (CDT)

I propose to add a bookmark with additions to the weapons. Accessories such as scopes, grenade launchers, flashlight. This is to be a gallery through which everyone will be able to recognize included in addition to weapons. All containers in one gallery.--[[User:Mateogala|Mateogala]] 05:18, 23 March 2012 (CDT)

== Guns selected for TV and Movies are not realistic ==

This is a great database and I salute the creators and contributors. But looking through the handguns used in TV and movies, they don't represent what real criminals would be using. In real life we'd see criminals with a lot of Hi-Points; Tauruses; Bersas etc not SIGs;H&K;Kimber;Sphinx;Walther and other expensive handguns. I don't know who is making the selection of handguns for TV and movies but I laugh every time I see a two bit hood in a show who is holding a pricey pistol when in real life he'd probably be carrying some cheap gun with no serial number so he can later ditch it or sell it. Whether it's the prop master or director or producer or if there are kick backs in some way I don't know but it would be nice to see mainly police procedurals use guns that real perps would use.

Again this is not a criticism of the database, you just report what firearms appeared in a series or film. Keep up the good work ![[User:Passinby|Passinby]] 12:32, 24 March 2012 (CDT)

:Actually, it's been determined that criminals prefer to use the best guns they can get their hands on (usually illegally). This means that while a criminal could go buy some Raven Arms piece of shit, they'll probably just break into somebody's home, look for a gun safe, and hope they get lucky with what's inside. Besides, if you're going to commit a crime with a gun, why buy one and get your name in the system at all? [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 04:37, 24 March 2012 (CDT)

Last data I saw was most illegal weapons were not acquired by theft but on the black market, originally purchased through straw purchases. Forensics labs see all types of guns that are used in crimes, not just top of the line ones. Guns used in crimes often disappear, I don't see most criminals carrying expensive ones that will disappear or get resold after a crime. I'm just pointing out that the handguns in TV and movies are beautiful but if the producers are aiming for realism the weapons don't match the streets.[[User:Passinby|Passinby]] 12:32, 24 March 2012 (CDT)

:I read an ATF report from a few years ago that stated that the most common pistols used in illegal activity were S&W revolvers and automatics, Ruger automatics, and cheap things like Raven Arms, Lorcin and Bryco automatics. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:02, 24 March 2012 (CDT)

== P226 Beavertail ==

I am attempting to ID a pistol that is used in multiple seasons of [[CSI: Miami]] ([[CSI:_Miami_-_Season_6#Unknown_SIG-Sauer|Shown Here]]). It seems that it might be a discontinued variant of a [[SIG-Sauer P226]] known as a "P226 Beavertail". Has anyone heard of such a gun? Better yet, anyone have a picture of such a gun?? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 21:54, 7 April 2012 (CDT)
:I already posted this on the talk page for CSI Miami, but I might as well post it here too. The picture on SIG's website under the P220 Beavertail is actually a P226 Beavertail, evidenced by the double stack bulges and P226 written on the grips and slide.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 23:10, 7 April 2012 (CDT)

==Need some help==

I changed the skin for IMFDB to a different skin... and only afterwards realized the there was no way to change it back. Also, the majority of the links and buttons normally present (including discussion page links) are gone. I can't even access my user account to change it back. Can anybody help me out (such as by providing me with a link to the preferences page so I can change the skin back)? [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 01:43, 8 April 2012 (CDT)

Talk:Main Page

2012-03-24T09:37:14Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* Guns selected for TV and Movies are not realistic */

''See [[Talk:Main_Page/Archive_1]] for older discussions''

== Team America: World Police ==

I was surprised to see that this 2004 marionet comedy movie does not appear on IMFDB. Would it be against any IMFDB 'rules' if I created such a page? I watched the movie again over the weekend and I was actually pleasantly surprised. Most guns used by the marionets were indeed somewhat fictional but the creators really seem to have been inspired by real-life guns and I'd love to get started on an IMFDB page for this movie. If nobody objects I will get to work on this. Thanks in advance for your feedback, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 15:02, 13 November 2011 (CST)
:I wouldn't think so; due to the scale of the props, I'm not sure that the weapons would actually be based on actual weapons, just "moulds" of them. I've seen the movie, and I think that they are very generic, so I think that making this page would go against the IMFDb rule of actually identifying weapons. --[[User:Jackbel|Jackbel]] 15:09, 13 November 2011 (CST)
::The weapons are pretty faithful to real guns. There is at least a Minimi, M134, M4 with 40mm grenade launcher, MP5K (with the stainless steel Navy suppressor), MP5A3, SKS RPG-7 and a few different varieties of AK-47 (identifiable, such as Norinco Type 56 with pig-sticker bayonet and Romanian AIMS). These are just off the top of my head and from a couple of clips on youtube. Even though the guns obviously aren't real I think it deserves a page, as they are all faithful representation of real guns. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:55, 13 November 2011 (CST)
Thanks for your quick comments, I understand the initial hesitation. However, just check below screenprints and you will see that indeed the makers did their homework, maybe they even checked IMFDB! Commando552's memory serves him right!
[[Image:TeamAmerica-screenshotexample.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]
I agree that the movie contains a lot of nonsense but I am actually tempted to go ahead, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 16:11, 13 November 2011 (CST)
:And It will be deleted just like last time as the "Weapons" are just whatever generic 1/6th scale guns the directors could find. they are obviously not real. The page has been deleted before and will most likely be removed again. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 16:17, 13 November 2011 (CST)
::The guns in anime and video games aren't real either. The guns aren't generic from what I can see, can identify them all (more so than some of the guns on pages like [[Crysis 2]]). If mods so no then fair enough, but I think it should have a page. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:57, 13 November 2011 (CST)
::: I'm with Commando552 on this one, if it's not eligible because the guns aren't real then all video games and anime should be removed because those guns aren't real they're drawings or digital constructs. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 18:38, 13 November 2011 (CST)

== New or original gun names? ==

When a gun was originally sold under one name but has since changed, which name should be used? A good example is that right now there are [[LaRue Tactical OSR]] and [[LaRue Tactical OBR]] pages. They are the exact same rifle (OSR image is the standard rifle while OBR is tricked out, both versions are currently shown on the LaRue website as the OBR), LaRue was just forced to change the name due to a copyright problem. In this kind of case, which name should be used? I would have just checked other pages to see what the norm is, but my mind is currently drawing a blank to other guns that have changed their name but remained otherwise the same. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:52, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:Oops... I was the one who made the [[LaRue Tactical OBR]] page. I sincerely thought they were different guns, one a Battle Rifle and the other a Sniper Rifle. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

== Sortable Tables ==

Zackmann08 had mentioned about modifying our current table format for weapons and actor pages to a version where the boxes are sortable. A sortable template is already made and can be seen on [[Amitabh Bachchan]]'s page (I've now modified it to look a little more like our current table format). This definitely would be beneficial for the gun pages, but I noticed it takes a little bit longer to load and not sure if users will understand what the sortable icon is for. Would like to get thoughts from admins and users on this before a change is completely made. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 22:18, 16 December 2011 (CST)

:You make a good point about users not knowing what the icon is for. It is in use on wikipedia a lot these days so i think a lot of people are familiar with it and worst case scenario, if they're not then the table is just left in it's default sort. Just my 2 cents on the matter...--[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:54, 16 December 2011 (CST)

::It doesn't work with rowspaned tables (like the ones on the [[Heckler & Koch MP5]] page) so it is a one or the other decision. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:28, 17 December 2011 (CST)

:::another very good point, but how many rowspan tables are really in use? Other than the MP5 page i dont recall seing any others, though i havent really been looking for them. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:37, 17 December 2011 (CST)

::::I've used them a few times, but generally only when there are a number of people from the same show/movie using the same weapon, as I think it looks better than having 10 or so entries with the same title and date in a row. If people decide against the rowspaned tables am happy to get rid of them though, was just my preference. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:50, 17 December 2011 (CST)

:::::I feel ya. They are definitely preferable to listing the same thing over and over but if the choice is between that and sortable tables, personally I think the sortable ones are worth losing the rowspan. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:40, 17 December 2011 (CST)

::::::I like the idea of sortable tables, especially for long pages like [[Beretta 92 pistol series#Beretta 92F/FS|Beretta 92F/FS]] or [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]]. However, I have noticed that currently there's a number of page formats depending on the respective contributor. I may not be so experienced with IMFDB like most of you, but it seems to me that it would make more sense to concentrate on developing a way to create a more uniform page format before we spend time on accepting more 'sexy' features. Pretty much like working on a house and spend time on the roof when the foundations have not been properly laid yet. Take care, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:29, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::I totally agree with [[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]]. I think what we really need is a single page that we can look at that has a template for everything. A section showing how to make a gun page. A section for actors, section for TV Shows, a section for Movies. That way we all know that this is the page everything should be based off of. This would be far better than saying "look at the M1911 page" because even pages like that have inconsistencies with formatting. The special page could even be put in the toolbar on the left side of the page under "toolbox". That would be amazingly helpful. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:57, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:Bunni made a template for gun pages: [[Template:Gun]] That's how a newly created gun page should look like. Of course, the gun specifications sections can be expanded with other stuff, like barrel length (if a gun comes with 2 or more different barrels, like the [[Remington MSR]] for example), country of Origin, Designer and Manufacturer (if it is not in the title of the page, e.g. [[9A-91]]).
:And about the sortable tables: I think it is a bad idea. Why would anyone wanna sort a table on an actor page by the notation or character the actor was playing. Sorting by year is the best option IMHO, on both actor and gun pages. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 11:37, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:: I can see why you wouldn't want to sort by notation, and character would basically result in sorting by movie, but I can see how you would want to sort by what guns an actor has used instead of just what year. Also, one of the benefits of the sortable tables is that some of the older pages that are NOT sorted can be fixed by simply changing the class="wikitable" to class="sortable". As for the template, it does need to be expanded but we also need to find a way to make sure people know it's there and that all pages should follow it. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:17, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::This is proving to be a highly educational discussion for me as a rookie IMFDB user. Actually, this is the first time I learn about the template pages, and to be honest I fear I am not the only one. Instead of searching through the website, how about simply displaying links to the template pages everytime somebody clicks the button to create a new page? I am sure this will lead to increased uniformity and substantially lower the barrier for new people to get started on a page. Taking things one step further, how about the following? If somebody indicates to create a brand new page, a question box is displayed asking e.g. to make a choice between movie, actor, gun etc. so that after this choice the relating template pops up? Again, I am not sure if this is feasible but I am quite interested to hear your feedback, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 14:23, 18 December 2011 (CST)

::::I LIKE THIS IDEA!!! We definitely need to make a page that has all the templates listed. Right now its really hard to track down the templates. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 14:52, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:Search for "<nowiki>Category:Templates</nowiki>" and it will show u all the templates. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 15:20, 18 December 2011 (CST)

::That helps but still that page needs to be publicized better. It also needs to be better explained. How are [[A-Team, The]] or [[MacGyver]] templates? When I create a new page, I find a good page and I copy the 'wiki code' from it into my new page and then just edit the text. My guess is this is what most people do and I feel like that is what we need. A page with dummy titles, names and guns for people to copy to a new page and work from. Thanks for letting me know about the Template page though. Didn't know that was there. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:03, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::I think that Zackmann08 is hitting the nail on the head. Building on above comments, how about the following? On the left side of all pages there's the master menu table in blue ('CATEGORIES/SPECIAL/TOOLBOX'). In 'CATEGORIES' one can choose between Movies/Guns/Actors/etc so why not add something simple like 'Templates for New Pages'? If you click that, you'd see just 7 options for new pages; (1) Movie, (2) TV, (3) Anime, (4) Video, (5) Actor, (6) Gun and (7) Others (for whatever else can be 'templated'). Any choice would lead to one single template with dummy info and a short explanation on how to use it. This way an immediate and easy access to the templates will be realized, rather than (I am sorry to say) searching through several menu's in the Toolbox option and finding dozens of random templates. Interested to know what you guys think, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 05:21, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::::This sounds perfect to me! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:41, 19 December 2011 (CST)

:::::So, any volunteers willing and able to start on an addition to "Categories" with "Templates for New pages"? Am not too familiar with such revisions, but do we need authorization from anybody? --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 09:25, 20 December 2011 (CST)

== Merry Christmas! ==

[[Image:IMFDB 2011 Christmas Card.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
--[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 14:22, 22 December 2011 (CST)

HAHAHA! I love it!

Merry Christmas guys :) --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 16:05, 22 December 2011 (CST)

== Gun Brands Pages ==

I had an interesting idea that I was curious what others thought of. I was thinking it might be helpful to have a page that listed all the guns made by a certain company. For example, a "Smith & Wesson" page that would list all the guns that they have. To clarify, it would only list guns that are on this site. As per the rules this is NOT a gun encyclopedia and gun pages are only on this site if they appear in a movie/tv show/etc. I feel that it could be quite helpful in trying to identify weapons. We could divide the pages into Pistols, Revolvers, Shotguns, Rifles, etc. just like a movie page and set it up as a table perhaps with some of the characteristics listed such as caliber(s), barrel length(s), etc. Would could even have a 'notes' column that list certain characteristics that help to identify it (for example for Taurus 92, "distinguished from the Beretta by its frame-mounted safety").

If this is an idea that people think might be useful, and if an admin will give me approval, I would love to create a trial page for one of the smaller companies. (I'd rather not do S&W to start with if it turns out people don't like it). I could perhaps start with Ruger which has a good number of guns. Please share your thoughts! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:07, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:Sounds like an interesting plan. Thing is that quite often I see a gun and I have a general idea what brand it could be but then I find myself flipping through many gunpages in the IMFDB hoping that the gun I am looking for has been properly registered under that brand's name. In the case of e.g. Smith & Wesson (to name but a brand...) I can imagine such a page to be very useful. Will be following this discussion, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:18, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::Yeah it seems like it would be a good idea.--[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 10:32, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Trial page is up and running! I went ahead and did [[Ruger]]. I threw in a gallery as well. I'm not sure whether it's better have it right after the table or to put it at the bottom of the page or what. Please share all your thoughts on the page! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:23, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:I think there is no need for the tables '''and''' galleries. Just simply put the caliber after the gun's name in the gallery. Like: "Ruger LCP - .380 ACP". Sorting gun's by type if definitely good, and seeing the thumbnail of the gun's will really speed up the IDing process (at least for me it will). The whole idea of these pages is great, considering that some guns (mostly Russians) are listed without the manufacturers' names. If more pages like this will spawn, we will need a "Gun Manufacturers" category, or something like that. I definitely support this idea, but the mods will decide. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:58, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::I completely agree. The only thing is that some of these guns have 5+ calibers which could be cumbersome in the Gallery format... It would be great to have a 'Gun Manufacturers' category. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:25, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::I also added the [[Barrett]] & [[FN Herstal]] pages. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 14:26, 23 December 2011 (CST)[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:44, 23 December 2011 (CST)
:::You could put them in table but have the far right column be a picture (put in <nowiki>[[Image:file_name.jpg|200px]]</nowiki>). Would take up more vertical room than a gallery, but you could then include calibre, magazine size (helpfull for identifying different 5/6 shot cylinder revolvers, and differences between double/single stack handguns for example), year introduced (which would also help with ruling stuff out for IDs in older films/TV) etc. I suppose a notes catagory could also ,be usefull, say if a gun is available in multiple finishes and stuff like that. I think these pages are a good idea, but I think having the specifications section is a bit irrelevent for a company, I would just tag it on the end of "About". --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:27, 23 December 2011 (CST)

This is what you mean, Commando?
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-align:left; font-size: 95%"
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="300"|'''Weapon'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Caliber(s)'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="250"|'''Capacity'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Introduced'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Image'''
|-
|[[Remington MSR]]|| .338 Lapua Magnum<br>.338 Norma Magnum<br>.300 Winchester Magnum<br>7.62x51mm NATO || 5, 7, 10|| Late 2000s||[[Image:RemingtonMSR.jpg|200px]]
|-
|[[XM2010|Remington XM2010 ESR]]|| .300 Winchester Magnum || 5|| 2010||[[Image:XM2010.jpg|200px]]
|-
|}
You are right BTW, the year and capacity can help a lot in IDing. [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 15:58, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:THAT LOOKS AWESOME!!! I am sold... That is how I am doing it. Next question, what do we want to do about variants? For example with the [[FN FAL]] do we also list the [[FN LAR]] on the [[FN Herstal]] page or just the [[FN FAL]] and figure if you are trying to identify the gun you will go to the FN FAL page and look at the variants? Same goes for the [[FN SCAR]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:28, 23 December 2011 (CST)
::Yeah, that's what I mean. I think this is more usefull than just a gallery, and also it would be a place where sortable tables would definitely be useful, as you could sort the guns by name or chronologically. For a while I've been meaning to do a table of all the Colt AR-15 variants for my own use, but would be good for the Colt page. AR-15s are kind of a special case as their are so many variants that are very similar at first glance, so would include more columns (like upper/lower receiver type, barrel length and profile, bayonet lug, stuff like that) so someone who didn't know much about different variants could sort the columns and work out what a gun is. Regardless if it ends up going on the Colt page, I'm going to make it and put it on my user page to see how it turns out.
::As for different variants I would list them as they can look noticeably different, as is the case with the FAR and the LAR (these are pretty distinctly different weapons, more of a grey area would be listing different FAL variants such as the 50.00, 50.61 and 50.63). With guns like the SCAR, I think the split should just be between the H and the L, not the different barrel lengths. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:43, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:::Fair enough. The other idea that I had was to add an additional column called "variants". This would be great for weapons like the MP5 which all have the same base. Got the idea from this wikipedia page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Heckler_%26_Koch_products Heckler and Koch]. Glad to see so many people are taking a liking to this idea. I defiantly want to make it happen. Also, the AR-15 idea is a GREAT one. Perhaps a 1911 page as well. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:56, 23 December 2011 (CST)
::::You talking like one page for ALL 1911 variants, or seperate pages for each 1911 company? But then how would we handle, say, an SW1911? Would it be on the S&W page, or the 1911 page? Or both?--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 23:31, 23 December 2011 (CST)
:I've continued working on the three trial pages ([[Ruger]], [[Barrett]] & [[FN Herstal]]). I have noticed that A LOT of these guns are missing the most basic information (no specifications). If anyone is looking for a task, that would be a great one. I will do my part once I get these pages fully up. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:32, 23 December 2011 (CST)
Loving the idea, I am considering making a SIG-Sauer trial page with the basics only, then going back later and adding in lesser known stuff. But I want to see how these pages come along!--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 23:31, 23 December 2011 (CST)

'''Please keep in mind that the mods will decide. DO NOT create additional gun manufacturer pages until an approval comes from them. It will be a waste of time if they delete them later.''' - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 02:26, 24 December 2011 (CST)
::That is why I said wanted to see what happened to these pages first.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 14:19, 24 December 2011 (CST)
:Another thing that would be great, is if anyone wants to go through the trial pages (([[Ruger]], [[Barrett]], [[Heckler & Koch]] & [[FN Herstal]]) and make sure that each weapon has specifications on its page that would be great. As i was creating these pages I noticed that most of the weapons were lacking the most basic specifications and info. (This could be yet another use for these pages!) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:08, 24 December 2011 (CST)

:::We had this discussion in the forum a long time ago, and the consensus was that it was NOT a useful means of classifying weapons on the site. Hence why I deleted the page originally. I'm still not sure it's all that useful. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 08:58, 24 December 2011 (CST)

::::I respectfully disagree. For someone like me who is a still a novice with guns it is exceptionally helpful when identifying weapons. This will be particularly true when it comes to things like the Smith and Wesson revolvers. It is often easy to identify the revolver is a Smith and Wesson but harder to know which model. If there is a single page that list all the Smith and Wesson revolvers it saves us from having to go through page by page. I just find it is so helpful to have one location where you can see a picture and the '''basics''' of the possible weapons. If it is helpful for some of us is it okay to leave these up? I will personally make sure that the pages are done in a professional looking manner and are not sloppily thrown together. I truly believe that (as long as they are done in the proper manner) they can make a fantastic addition to this already awesome website. (ok so that was a bit of kissing up but it's true, this site freaking rocks! :-) ) I'm also using this 'project' as an excuse to update many of these weapons so that their pages are in the correct format with specifications and descriptions.
::::I appreciate that I am still a new guy here and I '''really DO NOT''' want to be that guy who joins and says "nice thing you got going here but you should really change it because I know better." I DO NOT know better, please don't take this in that light. I am merely saying that there are a lot of people who would like to contribute but don't have the knowledge that some of you experts do. I think that this addition would help us novices contribute. I welcome your feedback. Oh, and a Merry Christmas/Happy Chanukah to everyone! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 09:21, 24 December 2011 (CST)

I propose changing 'introduced' to 'produced' and having it be a to and from date. Basically how long the weapon was in productions for. 1995-2005 rather than just 1995 for example. Any thoughts?? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:24, 25 December 2011 (CST)

Would love to hear some feedback from the admins on this project. I would like to continue with it but don't want to do a bunch of work and then have the pages removed. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 09:13, 26 December 2011 (CST)

Looks good. I'm a mod here. I really like the Colt page. The S&W page is going to be an intensive piece of labor for you. I agree with bunni. We need a category for these new pages. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 16:29, 27 December 2011 (CST)

I'm a mod as well and I really like what I'm seeing. This will be a lot of work but I think it will be quite an invaluable resource once it is finished, as long as it is done well. Kudos. - [[User:Speakeasy804|Speakeasy804]] 21:51, 6 January 2012 (CST)

I started the [[SIG-Sauer]] page, and am about 3/4 done. Any help would be appreciated! Oh, and if anyone knows how to change the name of a page I would greatly appreciate for it to be renamed ''SIG-Sauer Inc.''--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 17:33, 16 January 2012 (CST)

:[[SIG-Sauer]] is fine. According to Bunni we are not using "inc" or "LLC" in the page titles. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:34, 16 January 2012 (CST)

::That's fine, I wasn't sure if it was necessary or not.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 20:19, 16 January 2012 (CST)

== Battle Los Angeles ==

I have a question that I cant seem to get a good bead on, in the movie Battle Los Angeles Aaron Eckhart is seen using an m9 Beretta as his pistol,which I know is the main side arm used by US military forces. However, it was my understanding that the Marines used the 1911 as their sidearm and were the only branch to keep it as the main side arm. Eckhart's character in the movie is a grizzled old vet and had just put in for his 20 at the beginning of the movie meaning that he must have joined back in 1990-1991 and it would make sense to me why he would hold on to something like that. Either way please let me know what you got, thanks NavyBoyd
:For movie-specific discussions, please go to [[http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Talk:Battle:_Los_Angeles|the associated talk page]].--[[User:PistolJunkie|PistolJunkie]] 19:57, 23 December 2011 (CST)

== Gun Page Templates ==

As part of the 'Gun Brands Pages' project (see above), I am also trying to make sure that each weapon included has specifications listed on its page. I am using the following as my template. If anyone thinks it is missing anything, please let me know. (Note that I made it a subheading with 3 '=' instead of the normal 2 '=' so that it wouldn't be its own category. normally it would just have 2.) I personally don't feel that Muzzle Velocity or effective range are necessary but I am up for input and critique. Just want to make sure I am doing this right! Merry Christmas everyone!
Oh and under FireModes I am including DA,SA,DAO,DA/SA if applicable. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:38, 25 December 2011 (CST)
<br><br><-- start template-->
===Specifications===
(year - year)

* '''Type:''' Handgun/Revolver/Submachine Gun/Sniper Rifle/etc.

* '''Caliber(s):'''

* '''Weight:''' lb ( kg) (empty)

* '''Length:''' in ( mm)

* '''Barrel length:''' in ( mm)

* '''Capacity:'''

* '''Fire Modes:''' Safe/Semi-Auto/Full-Auto (950rounds/min)

-----
<--end template-->
:Another question that one of the veterans can help me out with. With guns that have Variations ([[Heckler & Koch P2000]] or [[Heckler & Koch USP]] for example), should each subcategory have its own specifications with the different length, capacity, etc. For example should the [[Heckler & Koch P2000]] have just one specifications section for the page or should there be one for the H&K P2000 and one for the H&K P2000SK. (This is the way I did the page but I want to make sure that this is ok. If I'm supposed to just do one section I will gladly correct it.) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:03, 25 December 2011 (CST)

== I can't create a new thread in the forum ==

I logged into the forum and tried to create a new thread, but I get a message that says I don't have permission to access the page. I'm using a different username than I have used before, so is my account "awaiting activation?"--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 11:06, 1 January 2012 (CST)
:I had the same problem a few days ago. You want to talk to [[User:Bunni|Bunni]]. He'll fix it for ya. Happy new year. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:28, 1 January 2012 (CST)
::Thanks for your help. I followed your advice and left a message for Bunni over a week ago but he hasn't yet responded. Has he not been around lately?--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 10:12, 13 January 2012 (CST)

== I think it's time to end the silencer/suppressor debate ==

I see this a lot, people correct other people "It's a suppressor, not a silencer. It doesn't silence the gun" and I think it really needs to stop. Way back in 1910, the first silencer was patented by Hiram Maxim as the '''SILENCER'''. Way back then, they weren't even that good compared to today's because the technology has been advanced on yet they were still called silencers. Them having the name silencer is just a name, after all there is a model of the Ithaca 37 called "Deer Slayer". It's a inanimate object which cannot slay deer. It can be used to kill deer however but the name doesn't fit it unless it operated on it's own to shoot deer. There are some people named Rose or Diamond but they aren't a flower or an expensive jewel. My point is with this is that it's just a name. Even today, the BATFE calls them silencers on the paper work and many companies that make them call them silencers. There is even a company called SilencerCO.

The reason why a lot of people call them suppressor is because in the 1970s the magazine, Soldier of Fortune, started calling them suppressors and giving the reason that I stated in the first sentence. Most people that I've seen that actually own them call them silencers and they have most likely done their research on them.

In conclusion, calling them silencers is not wrong and neither is calling them suppressors. You call them either and you're right. It's when you claim that silencer is the improper term. Silencer is just a name, it's the way it is.
--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 10:20, 9 January 2012 (CST)

: I personally prefer "suppressor", it's a nice, ''woody'', sort of word. --[[User:Milkovich|Milkovich]] [[File:Milkovich Signature.jpg|20px|frameless|link=User:Milkovich|]] 13:51, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:: Yes, "silencer" is a name, but it's a misnomer. "Silencer" suggests absolutely no sound is produced when a shot is fired; "Suppressor" properly states that the sound will be muffled instead of completely silenced. It's the same as saying bullet-resistant instead of bulletproof. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 17:52, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:::I don't see anyone complaining that their shotgun doesn't kill deer on it's own. IT'S A NAME and it's correct. .223 fires a .224 caliber bullet, are you going to complain about that too?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:37, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::::I agree. I think "Suppressor" sounds more accurate and professional. If it were a silencer, there would be little or no sound at all, which unless you use a suppressed .22 with half loads and a plastic bottle, is impossible, and even THAT makes a sound. I say we go with Suppressor.--[[User:Scattergun]]

:::::While "Silencer" is correct in general terms, the term "suppressor" is preferred largely because of the Hollywood concept of the "magic silencer" that literally makes a gunshot into the sound of a kitten sneezing. The "suppressor" term was coined to give a more realistic idea of what the device actually does; it suppresses the sound, it doesn't silence it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:05, 14 January 2012 (CST)

== NCIS: LA gun change? ==

The latest episode of NCIS: LA "Exit Strategy" the guns don't see to be the normal Sig 228s. The guns are still Sigs, but with rails, and Deeks was not carrying his normal Beretta. Deeks' weapon may have been the same S&W used in the episode "Empty Quiver". -Tucker

== Single or Double-Stack 1911? ==

Which is a better 1911 variant to have? A single stack or a double stack magazine. I heard somewhere that a 14-shot 1911 is more prone to jamming but I'm not sure. The reason is I am currently writing a script for an independent movie that me and my class will make and I have access to all kinds of guns, both blank-adapted and Japanese flash cap versions, and the main character is to carry a 1911 .45 and I was wondering what the more professional choice would be to carry.
:Personally I would go for a Kimber Custom II TLE or a Springfield Armoury TRP, both are single stackers. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 12:58, 13 January 2012 (CST)

== Novel guns? ==

I know this may seem like a stupid idea, but should we include guns that feature in books? I have several books in my bookcase that go into great detail about guns, albeit sometimes they call sub-machine guns machine guns for some reason. (Seriously, how can you mix it up?) I'm new here, please go easy, but please give it some thought. They could either be on the book cover or featured in print inside. I know it would be pointless to include a screenshot of the text, but there are some pages on IMFDB that are just lists of guns and pictures of the guns themselves.
Alasdair

:Check out the [[Rules, Standards and Principles]] page. It will help set your straight. Good thing for new users to read (I found this out the hard way just a few weeks ago when I joined). --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:35, 15 January 2012 (CST)

Ah, I see. Thanks. Alasdair.

== Manufacturer Pages ==

With more people starting to work on Manufacturer Pages, I'm working on making a template for the pages ([[Manufacturer Template]]). I am going to add a link to it from the <nowiki>[[Category:Manufacturer]]</nowiki> page. I figure this will help to make sure that they all stay consistent. (Note: not all of the pages that I have already made conform to the standards that I listed on the template, I will be fixing that in the next few days.) My goal is to make sure that these pages look professional and are useful! If anyone, particularly admins, has things that would like to add to the pages or to correct with future pages, please edit the template accordingly. Thanks! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:41, 19 January 2012 (CST)

== Glock Manufacturer's Page ==

I was getting ready to make the Glock page for the new Manufacturers category and ran into a small problem. The new page would ideally be called ''Glock'' but that is already taken by the [[Glock]] page which has all their guns. I definitely think this page would be helpful (at least I know it would I'd find it useful) as it will help you decide whether you are looking at a G17 or a G21. I welcome any and all ideas and suggestions. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 17:54, 19 January 2012 (CST)
:The actual company is trademarked in all capitals as GLOCK so you could do that. Either that or you could put "manufacturer" in brackets after it, or make this the one exception where you put on the crap after the name, in this case "Ges.m.b.H.". If not that, I don't think a manufacturer page is as important for Glocks as other brands, as they are all already on the same page. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:05, 19 January 2012 (CST)
::All good ideas. I'll prolly just go with (manufacturer). I agree that its not as important but it could still be super useful. I think I'm going to add a 'frame' column like we did with the S&W revolvers. This time it will have "Compact" "Standard", "SubCompact", etc.. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 18:29, 19 January 2012 (CST)

== Taurus ==

I am in the process of redoing all the [[Taurus]] gun pages. Giving them all specifications, converting to wiki-table, etc. If there are any Taurus aficionados in the house who are willing and able to fill in the information that I am having trouble finding (mainly production dates), that would be great! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:15, 20 January 2012 (CST)

== Beretta ==

I'm in the process of making the [[Beretta]] page. My understanding is that for Semi-Automatic pistols we DO NOT include "Model" in the page title, [[Beretta 418]] for example. There are a few pages that are not consistent with this pattern. Just want to make sure that they are all named correctly and follow the same rules. Could an admin look into this? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 23:52, 20 January 2012 (CST)

== Proper name for CZ ==

It has been brought to my attention that the new Manufacturer page for [[CZ]] may not be properly named. The full name of the manufacturer is "Česká zbrojovka Uherský Brod". I am hesistant to use this name for a couple reasons. 1) Its kind of a pain to type on a 'standard' keyboard. 2) Most people (I THINK) know the company as "CZ". One possible compromise I'm considering is renaming the page "CZ (Česká zbrojovka Uherský Brod) and having "CZ" redirect there. I would love to hear some thoughts on the matter. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:45, 25 January 2012 (CST)
:I would use the full name with a redirect, but if you are calling it CZUB rather than Česká zbrojovka, that would exclude at least a couple of guns, such as the vz. 24 which was made by Československá zbrojovka Brno. I'm no expert on CZ, but it was my understanding that any words after the "Česká zbrojovka" part were just different factories, or is this wrong? While talking about proper names for gun pages, what should the page be called if the manufacturer has changed its name or merged? For example, when I made the [[Royal Small Arms Factory]] page I used the original name rather than Royal Ordnance. However I was going to make a Denel Land Systems page, which was originally called Lyttleton Engineering Works, but the Denel name is much more commonly known so didn't know what to use. Any suggestions for a general rule on this sort of thing? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:23, 25 January 2012 (CST)
::I think we definitely need a [[CZ]] expert to take a look at this page... Any volunteers??? As for the different names, first and foremost, whatever the page ends up being, there should be redirects form all the others. So for example [[Royal Ordnance]] should redirect to the [[Royal Small Arms Factory]]. Also, whatever the final name of the page ends up being, there should be a short explanation about the fact that it is "Also Known As ______" or "Formally Known As ____". As for a general rule, while I think it would be best to go with what the company is most commonly known as, in the end, that is a matter of opinion. Personally, I think the rule of thumb should be to go with what the company is currently known as (use the company website?) and have other names redirect there. Just my 2 cents on the matter.
::As a side note, while talking about redirect, I'm also trying to set up redirects for these pages that will help newcomers when searching the site. For example, if you search S&W now, instead of getting a page listing all the times that that the letters 'S' and 'W' appear on a page, you are now taken to the [[Smith & Wesson]] page. Just food for thought. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:36, 25 January 2012 (CST)
what exactly do you want to know about the CZ? I grew up in czechoslovakia, we used to carry these handguns in the army.

==A question about a bolt ==

Off-topic, but could anyone ID this bolt? http://www.forgottenweapons.com/mystery-bolt
Thanks, a relatively new and inexperienced user.

==Site Policy On 'Made Up' Weapons==
Could someone please clarify the site's policy on guns fabricated for films and videogames? I've edited articles on the Killzone games in the past only to have the articles taken down altogether because the guns featured aren't real. Now I'd accept that as fair enough, except other articles (e.g. [[Alien: Resurrection]] and [[Perfect Dark]]) deal with non-existent weapons at some length and nobody complains, even though some of the weapons they describe feature far ''less'' in common with real guns than the Killzone games' weapons did; at least many of those featured parts that were readily identifiable as belonging to real-world weapons. By deleting one and sparing the others, you're creating something of a double standard--[[User:Leigh Burne|Leigh Burne]] 09:56, 31 January 2012 (CST)

== Gun Title Template ==

Is there any way to get rid of the '''<nowiki><br clear=all></nowiki>''' that results from using the Gun Title template? I noticed that it can cause some problems when the gun in question has multiple images as there will be a bunch of white space before the list of occurrences. For an example of what I mean look at [[Smith & Wesson Model 610]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:14, 1 February 2012 (CST)

== Gangster Squad ==

Since I can't create a thread in the forum I decided to post this here.

The upcoming movie Gangster Squad will be released this year, and someone managed to record scenes being filmed, then posted the videos on Youtube. A couple of the videos feature shootouts.

This first one shows the "Gangster Squad" involved in a firefight and has a lot of M1 Thompson action:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNlUBrd0uTc&feature=endscreen&NR=1 Gangster Squad 1]

The second video shows what I'm assuming are gangster-types, which is shot too far away to make positive ID's on all the weapons, but I think I know what most of them are. Two of them are using the usual Thompsons, but the guy kneeling between the cars seems to have a Sten, judging by the way he's holding it. There's another guy firing an smg, which due to the way he's holding it and it's rate of fire, I think is either an MP-40 or M-3. It's impossible to tell because he's obscured by a car. I'm pretty sure the guy up in the building is using a Lewis Gun.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xf0iEgtzBw&feature=related Gangster Squad 2]

I love these period crime movies, and this one looks really promising. What I'm seeing in these videos suggests there will be some great shootouts in this movie, and I just hope that's what we actually get in the final cut--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 09:04, 2 February 2012 (CST)

== How do i add upload an image here? ==

I have gun to add, how do i add an image of it?

Also, how do i create a user page for myself?

Sorry if i am in the wrong section. If so, then please guide me to the right section.

:Look to the left; under Toolbox is upload file. To edit your user page, go to the top of the screen, where it has your username, followed by My Talk, My Preferences, ect. Click your username (red means there is nothing there yet).--[[User:Jackbel|Jackbel]] 19:38, 4 February 2012 (CST)

== Fictional Airsoft Guns ==

Just noticed that on the [[Milkor MGL]] page there is an entry for the [[Milkor_MGL#CAW_40mm_Grenade_Launcher|CAW 40mm Grenade Launcher]], an airsoft grenade launcher. It seems random that it is on this page as it is a fictional design that shares basically nothing with the Milkor. Are there many other fictional airsoft variants that appear in stuff (only one I can think of off the top of my head is that weird AKS-74U variant that is in Call of Duty), if so is it worth creating a page for fictional airsoft guns that do not have a real world equivalent? I previously made a similar page for [[Blank Fire Only Guns]] that are not based on any specific live fire weapon, would be like that. Anyone have any thoughts on this? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:56, 7 February 2012 (CST)

- Personally, I think if it resembles the weapon, even if its fictional, it should share the page at the bottom. After all, the Bruni 1911 and the Bruni Python aren't real guns but they share a page with their real world Colt counterparts. At least thats how I feel about it. -[[User:Scattergun]]

:That is different to what I am talking about though. The very reason that the two guns you mentioned are where they are (at the bottom of the live fire equivalent page) rather than on the blank fire page is that they are clearly based on real world guns. The Bruni Olympic 6 however isn't based on any particular real world design and is just a generic revolver, hence it being on the blank fire page. My idea was that airsoft guns that are not based on any particular gun, such as the grenade launcher I mentioned above, could be put on one page for ID and listing purposes. My question really was are there enough "unique", for lack of a better term, airsoft guns around to make a page like this worth it? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:10, 7 February 2012 (CST)

== Naming conventions for SIG guns ==

Now that I have finished the S&W pages, I am moving on to revamping the SIG Sauer pages. I wanted to get feedback, particularly from admins, about the consisten disagreement about SIG vs SIG Sauer vs SIG-Sauer and see if we could come to a consensus. Some of the page have the full '''SIG-Sauer''' in the title ([[SIG-Sauer P220 pistol series]] & [[SIG-Sauer P230]]) while other simply have '''SIG''' ([[SIG P210]] & [[SIG SG 540]]). If for no other reason than to make sure that FUTURE pages are done correctly, which is the proper format? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:49, 9 February 2012 (CST)
:It's not a matter of shorthand, the correct title depends on the firearm in question. The pistols with SIG-Sauer as the title were made by SIG-Sauer Inc., while the ones with SIG as the title were made by SIG independently, not with Sauer. Generally, the older guns (P210 & 510) are made by SIG only or Swiss Arms (which refers to themselves as SIG), while newer guns are SIG-Sauer. What I suppose I'm trying to say is that the titles are accurate as-is. As to whether the admins want SIG-Sauer or SIG Sauer is beyond me, although as they are two companies joined together I'm pretty sure there would be a hyphen.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 22:27, 9 February 2012 (CST)
::OOOOOHHHHHHHHH!! That makes so much more sense.... I never actually realized that SIG and Sauer were 2 separate companies that merged. Thank you SO much for that explanation!
::Given that, disregard my initial question! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 00:17, 10 February 2012 (CST)
:::Having said that, I still think all of the page that say "SIG-Sauer" should get rid of the hyphen and say "SIG Sauer", as this is how both the Swiss/German and American companies spell it. If there is an actual reason for adding in a hyphen then fair enough, but has always seemed a bit random to me. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:17, 10 February 2012 (CST)
Taken directly from the [[SIG-Sauer P220 pistol series]] page: ''NOTE: In the past, some IMFDB users have mis-spelled "SIG-Sauer" as "Sig Sauer". "Sig Sauer" is not the correct spelling; "SIG" is an acronym for Swiss Industrial Society ("Schweizerische Industrie Gesellschaft " in German), and thus, all three letters should be capitalized. Also, it is preferred that IMFDB users put a hyphen between "SIG" and "Sauer".''--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 12:23, 12 February 2012 (CST)
:I've seen the message that putting the hyphen in is the preferred method on imfdb, but I don't understand why this is. As I said, neither the US or swiss/german companies use the hyphen so why do we? If it is a formatting reason or something technical that I don't understand then fair enough, but otherwise I think it should be deleted. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:09, 12 February 2012 (CST)
::I have to agree with Commando here... Both Wikipedia and http://www.sigsauer.com/ list it as '''SIG Sauer'''. Why was the decision made to include the Hyphen here? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:36, 12 February 2012 (CST)

== Television wikitable ==

Up until now I have been using the following table for any pages that I convert from list format to table format:
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-align:left; font-size: 95%"
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="250"|'''Show Title / Episode'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Actor'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Character'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Note'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Air Date'''
|-
| ''[[CSI: Miami]]'' / "Down to the Wire" || [[Tom Sizemore]] || Private Investigator Kurt Rossi || || 2002 - Present
|-
|}
I was considering modifying this to give '''Episode''' its own column. I wanted to see what people thought of this idea...
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-align:left; font-size: 95%"
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Show Title'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Episode(s)'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Actor'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Character'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Note'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Air Date'''
|-
| ''[[CSI: Miami]]'' || "Down to the Wire" || [[Tom Sizemore]] || Private Investigator Kurt Rossi || || 2002 - Present
|-
|}
Any feedback is appreciated. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 01:26, 11 February 2012 (CST)
:I've been combining the episode and note columns. I think I picked that up from Ben. That always made sense for me because episode info or notes are sometimes missing or unnecessary, while Show Title is ALWAYS present. I've always tried to supply episode info, and it could get a little tight when it's in there with the show name. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 01:42, 11 February 2012 (CST)

== Sako vs SAKO ==

I want to come to another consensus here... Is it SAKO or Sako? I.E. [[SAKO 85 Hunter]] vs [[Sako TRG-21]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:40, 11 February 2012 (CST)
:It's an acronym (Suojeluskuntain Ase- ja Konepaja Oy), which would suggest all caps. If you go to the US website, the page is titled "SAKO Finland." Strangely enough, if you go to the "Company" link, they refer to themselves as just "Sako." --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 15:36, 11 February 2012 (CST)

== Companies w/ one single product ==

I have always wondered, what about those companies that have only one single product, like AMSD, Rafael, DRS Precisions,... (I am sure there is more) Can they have a Manufacturer page or not? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 06:53, 12 February 2012 (CST)
:Can they? Yes... Should they? No... Just my humble opinion... --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:49, 12 February 2012 (CST)

== Featured Articles ==

Question for our admins regarding the featured articles on the main page. What is the process for becoming a featured article? I know that for obvious reasons (preventing vandalism, etc.) the [[Template:FeaturedArticle2]] is locked, but is there a way for us non-admins to suggest new articles? Could we perhaps set something up whereby non-admins could post an addition in the discussion page for [[Template:FeaturedArticle2]] and if an admin approves of the addition, it could then be added into the mix? I really do love the random articles that pop up on the front page but as a very frequent visitor, seeing the same images over and over starts to get a little boring... Even just changing the images for a given "Featured Article" would be nice. For example, keeping [[The Unit]] (one of the best articles on the site) as a featured article but choosing 2 different images to be displayed. Any thoughts? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:34, 13 February 2012 (CST)

== Wannabe Indie game dev has some questions ==

I'm looking into making a simple target range simulator, most likely in a software like Unity3d or Coppercube which i have experience in. I am however unsure if entire realism is a good or possibly bad move, not only for game-play, but also because I feel it wouldn't have that... special feeling of a video game, when you play a role playing game for example, they all have their own mood. Pokemon is not Final Fantasy is not The Elder Scrolls. My main concern is how all target range simulator's I've played always go graphics realism, but the shooting mechanics tend to be surreal. This makes it not very fun for many people, people who like goals in their games get to set high scores, but not much else. People who possess firearm knowledge are easily ticked off by the fact that it is trying to be real, but lacks true realism due to all sorts of game-play errors. So while this may seem far fetched, my idea is simple. Mix a realistic (game-play) target range with surreal and almost child-like simple 3d graphics and a basic plot. For those familiar with the concepts in Pokemon, the player character has two primary goals, to collect info on all the monsters, and to defeat all the gym leaders and then the elite four. Target ranges would be like gyms, each has people who you can challenge to accuracy, fastest shot, and other contests of skill. While traveling from range to range, you can collect more firearms, not in grass, but from vendors and helping people with small side-quests, etc. I doubt this kind of a game would receive much, if any audience, particularly being that it's too serious and gun-friendly in content for most children (or more specifically, their parents) to buy, and it's far too childish in graphics for Adults. It's a happy middle where it's a game i would personally love to play, and hopefully so would a few others out there somewhere. All in all, I think a target range and competition based collection RPG with a heavy emphasis on gameplay and fun while still maintaining key aspects of gun culture would be a unique game. (things like policing your brass to be reused with powder and appropriate caliber bullets as a cheaper way to procure and load ammunition, maybe even allowing you to tweak the amount of powder that way). It's hard to explain the whole concept as I haven't nailed every little thing down yet. I was planning on starting the project on a smaller scale, then slowly adding more. So is this a good idea or am i barking up the wrong tree? I'd love to do full realism, but I honestly want the game to be atleast partially fun or stylized. (I am not looking for help making this game, I merely want feedback on the ideas) (I also hope I did not break anything by posting this, I am unfamiliar with wiki editing, and I am relying on your guides.) --[[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 12:31, 18 February 2012 (CST)

:First thing: please post "I am not a bot" after this message before you post anything else on this wiki. Your message seems a little...out of place, and I want to check it's not automated spam. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:44, 18 February 2012 (CST)

::Not a bot, Sorry for any confusion based on the ludicrous idea and my unusual name choice. I couldn't find any other place where i could... Oh. you have a forum. How did i miss that? Sorry. Seems so obvious now that it's glaring at me on the left. And now I forgot to sign. --[[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 14:07, 18 February 2012 (CST)

::Email confirmed on forums, but now Posting Rules: You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts... Whaaa? --[[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 14:12, 18 February 2012 (CST)

:::Unfortunately the automatic approvals don't work for some reason, you'll need to leave a message on [[User:Bunni]]'s talk page to get approved. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:06, 23 February 2012 (CST)

== Top Shot ==

For all you [[Top Shot]] fans, we have a new viewer of IMFDB. I just got re-tweeted by Colby Donaldson... He's checking out the page. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 21:16, 22 February 2012 (CST)
:Haha, that's great!--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 21:18, 22 February 2012 (CST)

== SOCOM 4 ==
Anyone agree it would would a great idea to add Socom 4 with the other SOCOM games in the video game category?--[[User:Commandoninja137|Commandoninja137]] 21:28, 23 February 2012 (CST)

== CSI ==

I am in the process of trying to redo the [[CSI]] pages. There are a LOT of guns used in these series. I feel like they deserve as much attention as the [[NCIS]] pages which are awesome at the moment. If anyone has any of the seasons on DVD and is interested in helping that would be awesome. I just finished [[CSI: NY - Season 7]] and am preparing to do season 6. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:46, 24 February 2012 (CST)

== New "Current" template ==

So we already have a number of awesome templates for labeling pages. The '''Upcoming''' template for stuff that hasn't been released yet. The '''Work in Progress''' template for pages that someone is currently working on. Anyone have any thoughts on making a new template for pages that are currently being updated? For example, the current season of [[NCIS]] or the current season of [[Hawaii Five-0]]. There not exactly "upcoming" because the upcoming template specifically says "all images are from trailers" and they aren't exactly a work in progress... Just a thought. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:20, 29 February 2012 (CST)

== New category: "Containing Unidentified Firearm"? ==

I was just wondering if it would make sense to create a new category "Containing Unidentified Firearm" for movies that contain a gun that cannot be identified by the page creator. This way, anybody (like me...) who gets a kick out of identifying a gun that other people could not, can very efficiently assist others to complete pages. If you guys think it's a good idea, any suggestions how to create/promote this category? Thanks for any comments, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 15:43, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:I was thinking about that just last night... I think its a GREAT idea! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:32, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
::Great! Could you advise on the following; (1) what would be a good name? (2) how to create that category? and (3) how can I get other users to start using the category? Look forward to hear from you, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 16:49, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:::I would advise talking to a few admins before doing anything else. We wanna get feedback from them before proceeding. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 17:38, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
::::A good name for this category might be "Movies with unidentified guns" or "Featuring unknown weapons" or something like that. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 19:16, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:::::I agree that something like this would be a good idea. Something to bear in mind though, there are a lot of pages with unidentified guns on this site, most of the time because they are only seen partially, briefly, from a distance or in poor lighting, or just due to the fact that they may be "generic" looking (I bet there are a hell of a lot of pages on here that say "unidentified revolver"). With most of these guns it will be impossible to get a firm ID so the tag will remain there forever, meaning that if someone wanted to try and be helpful and ID a few guns 99% of them would be a vaguely pistol shaped shadow (if it was a chronological list this would be less of a problem but categories are alphabetised). I think a better solution might be to have a discussion page somewhere where people can post caps of unidentified guns they have found whilst building pages, adding the new unidentified gun at the top of the page. This way you would be able to periodically purge the guns that are unidentifiable (e.g. speck in the distance) and would allow discussion between people to help ID the guns. I think it would also be a more successful way of getting unknown guns identified, as if you are good at IDing guns you can just watch this hypothetical page and see whenever a new unidentified gun crops up, as opposed to with a category where you don't know (as for as I know) when something has been added to it. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 20:37, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
Commando makes a good point. I propose a middle ground. There is a difference between "'''I''' cannot identify this gun" and "this gun cannot be identified". A gun that is only seen for a split second may not be identifiable and may simply be called an "unknown" revolver/pistol/etc. Pages that have those types of guns would NOT fall under this category. On the other hand, if you are working on a page and dont know what some of the guns are, you can add the tag and that will be a clue to some of our more experienced members to swoop in and help out. I'm in the process of capping all 20+ seasons of the 3 [[CSI]]s and there are a LOT of guns (particularly revolvers) that I can't identify but from time to time senior members come in and identify them. It would be great to tag these pages until either a) all guns are identified or b) a determination is made that 1 or more guns simply cannot be identified from the images provided. Basically I look at this as a variation of the WorkInProcess template. The page is done, all guns are uploaded, but not everything has been identified. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:56, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:Check out the template... [[Template:Unidentified]] --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 21:44, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
::As long as it was only used for guns that could be identified if you knew what they were rather than guns you don't see properly it would probably be helpful. Still, would be nice if there was some way of doing it chronologically so you could see when a new thing with unidentified guns is added. Just throwing it out there, here is another possible image to use for the unidentified guns template. I think it looks more like a question mark and is actually made from real weapons (a Korobov TKB-022 and a No. 74 sticky bomb). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:06, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
::[[File:Question mark 2.jpg|thumb|50px|none|]]
:::AWWW but i spent so much time making that quesiton mark just right!!! Grrr... Yorus is better tho... :-p --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:29, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
I like the idea and the templates, but rather than make it too complicated trying to get the question mark perfect, what if we just put a gun overlaying a simple, perfectly recognizable question mark. I like the idea of making the gun into a question mark, but I really have to look in order to see it on those. If I had any idea how to make one, I would.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 15:59, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
:I don't mind if the question mark gun thing isn't used, in fact a regular blacked out background photo of a gun would be better as would be more in keeping with the other templates, but what is the perfect "unknown" gun that the majority of people cannot identify? [http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:Gun_Cylon_stunt.jpg This]? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:02, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
::We could use something like that, or what about a blurry outline of a gun in front of a question mark? I think that the question mark makes the template identifiable, rather than just the words 'Unidentified Firearm' across the middle.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 18:02, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
:::I like [[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]]'s idea. We definatly want to keep the question mark up there. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:05, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
::::Since the majority of unidentified guns I've seen are revolvers, why not make it a S&W Model 27 or a Colt Official Police (or some other revolver... I dislike the idea of using a weird gun for some reason). Maybe make it a Vz 58? It looks like an AK to the untrained eye, and would be mistaken for such if not for the people on this website. Inside joke, huh? [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 19:24, 13 March 2012 (CDT)
::::Thanks for all your input, what a short post from me a week ago can cause hahaha I like the 'Unidentified' logo and I have put it on top all movies where somebody else may be able to identify a gun I could not, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 13:19, 18 March 2012 (CDT)

== Infoboxes. ==

I am interested in trying to get the [[Template:Infobox Movie|Movie Infobox]] more widely used on the site. I think that ''if it is done well'' it could be very useful on the pages. One of the best features of wikipedia (IMHO) is the infoboxes which give you the basic information at a glace without needing to search the page. I would love some input from people, particularly the admins, regarding how best to make these infoboxes better. I want to make sure that the information they list is useful and valid, not just text filler and puff. Post your thoughts! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:51, 16 March 2012 (CDT)

== The idea to change the page ==

The idea to change the page. An example of the new page. The rest of the site will have a basic table.

{| align="center" style="text-align:center"
!align="center"|<div style=font-size:300%>MP40 Gallery</div><br>
|-
|<div style="text-align=center">

<gallery widths=450px perrow=2>
Image:MP40.jpg|MP40 - 9x19mm
Image:MP40Side.jpg|MP40 submachine gun - 9x19mm
</gallery></div>
|-
|}
=== Specifications ===

{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-
<div style="text-align=center">
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Category'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="650"|'''Data'''
|-
|'''Place of origin || Nazi Germany
|-
|'''Production''' || 1940 - 1944
|-
|'''Manufacturer''' || [[Erma Werke]]
|-
|'''Caliber''' || 9mm
|-
|'''Cartridge''' || 9x19mm Parabellum
|-
|'''Weight''' || 4 kg (8.82 lb)
|-
|'''Length''' || 833 mm (32.8 in) stock extended / 630 mm (24.8 in) stock folded
|-
|'''Barrel length''' || 251 mm (9.9 in)
|-
|'''Rate of fire''' || 500 rounds/min
|-
|'''Effective range''' || 70 m
|-
|'''Feed system''' || 32-round detachable box magazine / 64-round with dual magazines
|}

Do you like someone, such a proposal? It should be applied to each side of the gun?--[[User:Mateogala|Mateogala]] 14:51, 21 March 2012 (CDT)

This is an example of the new layout. It is more clear and transparent. You can change the way every weapon in the service. >>[[MG81]]<< How do you like it? --[[User:Mateogala|Mateogala]] 16:03, 21 March 2012 (CDT)

:This new format has not been approved and please change your entry in the [[MG81]] into the correct format already established. Please place your suggestion for a change in the [[Talk:MG81|MG81 Discussion]] page. Unfortunately this table is too big and would make the gun pages too cluttered. We also have many different pictures of guns that don't have both sides photographed. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 19:06, 21 March 2012 (CDT)

== New idea to help identify guns ==

So a while ago I started the Manufacturer pages as a way to help identify guns. I had another idea that I wanted to try on for size with people. Recently, I was working on [[CSI: Miami - Season 9]] and came across a submachine gun that I didn't recognize. I immediately went to the [[:Category: Submachine Gun]] page but was forced to go through every link trying to find the one that I was looking for.

What do you guys think of adding a gallery of some sort to the Category pages that shows the BASIC models of the guns included? When I say basic I mean that we wouldn't need an image of the MAC-10, MAC-11 and Cobray M11/9. Seeing the basic MAC-10 would be enough to direct you to the MAC-10 page where you can figure out whether the gun you are looking at is in fact a MAC-10 or one of the other variants. Similarly, an image of any one of the MP5s would suffice, we wouldn't need images of each of the variants.

If I can get the okay from at least one admin, I would love to try this out on the [[:Category: Submachine Gun]] page and see what you all think. :-)
(Note that I also posted this in the forum).

--[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 18:19, 17 March 2012 (CDT)

:YOU MUST IMPLEMENT THIS ON ALL THE WEAPON CATEGORY PAGES. Sorry about the caps lock, this is just such an awesome idea, and it turned out so well on the submachine gun page. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 18:40, 18 March 2012 (CDT)

::HAHAHAHA!!!! I'm glad you liked it. Give a few days, lets get some more reaction but I agree with you, particularly since it doesn't involve creating a new page, its just taking advantage of a page that already exist. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 18:43, 18 March 2012 (CDT)

Another thing that could reduce the time looking at gun images is the creation of new gun categories, like "Pocket Pistol", "Light Machine Gun", "Civilian Rifle", "IAR" and stuff like this. This could help filter the guns more. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 18:02, 19 March 2012 (CDT)
:I like that idea. Take a look at how I did the [[Sniper Rifles]] page. I split it up by Bolt Action, Semi-Auto and other. I was thinking of doing the same thing when I do the files section with an additional category for Lever action. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 18:33, 19 March 2012 (CDT)

One thing that I am defiantly going to need help with is making sure that these tables stay updated. If and when new guns are added to the site, we need to make sure that they get added to the appropriate tables. If you guys can help me keep an eye on the "Recently Added Pages" section that would be great! Also, I just finished the [[Shotguns]] section. I wasn't sure what to do about the [[12 Gauge Double Barreled Shotgun]]s page so for now I just left it out of the gallery. Input is welcome! :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:04, 20 March 2012 (CDT)
:Maybe you should add a "Dual-Mode" section to the list and place the SPAS-12, SPAS-15, and Benelli M3 there. (Or list them in both pump and semi sections) And semi-auto and full-auto SGs should be separated. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:18, 20 March 2012 (CDT)

::Don't want to over complicate things by adding more categories than are necessary. I did put the SPAS-12 in both but I didnt realized that the SPAS-15 and Benelli M3 also fit under both sections. As for the Submachine Guns, there aren't many that are semi-auto only so let's keep them all together. Plus, that is not a main identifying feature since many "Semi-Auto Only" guns are converted for a movie. The point is to help identify the guns. The fact that a shotgun is Pump-Action vs Semi-Auto is very obvious during a movie and will help in identifying the gun. Also, with the exception of dual mode shotguns such as the SPAS-12, these guns can't be converted (at least not the same way an armorer can convert a semi-auto gun to full-auto). In other words, you will never see a semi-auto [[Ithaca 37]] but you could see a full-auto [[Steyr SPP]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:00, 20 March 2012 (CDT)

I'm in the process of working on the handguns section. I am going to need a LOT of feedback on this and will warn you ahead of time that it is going to be VERY cluttered when it is first uploaded. I think I am up to 5 categories at the moment: Compact, Standard, Long, Target and Other. I may split the "compact" into Pocket and Compact but we'll see what it looks like when I'm done. I'm just doing the code in notepad for the moment so that I can upload it in one move instead of in drips and drabs. Keep the feedback coming! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:27, 22 March 2012 (CDT)
:Just completed the [[pistols]] page. I would love some help checking it. I'm sure there are AT LEAST a few typos. I'm sure i mislabeled an image or something so any help is welcome! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:21, 22 March 2012 (CDT)

I propose to add a bookmark with additions to the weapons. Accessories such as scopes, grenade launchers, flashlight. This is to be a gallery through which everyone will be able to recognize included in addition to weapons. All containers in one gallery.--[[User:Mateogala|Mateogala]] 05:18, 23 March 2012 (CDT)

== Guns selected for TV and Movies are not realistic ==

This is a great database and I salute the creators and contributors. But looking through the handguns used in TV and movies, they don't represent what real criminals would be using. In real life we'd see criminals with a lot of Hi-Points; Tauruses; Bersas etc not SIGs;H&K;Kimber;Sphinx;Walther and other expensive handguns. I don't know who is making the selection of handguns for TV and movies but I laugh every time I see a two bit hood in a show who is holding a pricey pistol when in real life he'd probably be carrying some cheap gun with no serial number so he can later ditch it or sell it. Whether it's the prop master or director or producer or if there are kick backs in some way I don't know but it would be nice to see mainly police procedurals use guns that real perps would use.

Again this is not a criticism of the database, you just report what firearms appeared in a series or film. Keep up the good work !

:Actually, it's been determined that criminals prefer to use the best guns they can get their hands on (usually illegally). This means that while a criminal could go buy some Raven Arms piece of shit, they'll probably just break into somebody's home, look for a gun safe, and hope they get lucky with what's inside. Besides, if you're going to commit a crime with a gun, why buy one and get your name in the system at all? [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 04:37, 24 March 2012 (CDT)

Talk:Main Page

2012-03-18T23:40:23Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* New idea to help identify guns */

''See [[Talk:Main_Page/Archive_1]] for older discussions''

== Team America: World Police ==

I was surprised to see that this 2004 marionet comedy movie does not appear on IMFDB. Would it be against any IMFDB 'rules' if I created such a page? I watched the movie again over the weekend and I was actually pleasantly surprised. Most guns used by the marionets were indeed somewhat fictional but the creators really seem to have been inspired by real-life guns and I'd love to get started on an IMFDB page for this movie. If nobody objects I will get to work on this. Thanks in advance for your feedback, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 15:02, 13 November 2011 (CST)
:I wouldn't think so; due to the scale of the props, I'm not sure that the weapons would actually be based on actual weapons, just "moulds" of them. I've seen the movie, and I think that they are very generic, so I think that making this page would go against the IMFDb rule of actually identifying weapons. --[[User:Jackbel|Jackbel]] 15:09, 13 November 2011 (CST)
::The weapons are pretty faithful to real guns. There is at least a Minimi, M134, M4 with 40mm grenade launcher, MP5K (with the stainless steel Navy suppressor), MP5A3, SKS RPG-7 and a few different varieties of AK-47 (identifiable, such as Norinco Type 56 with pig-sticker bayonet and Romanian AIMS). These are just off the top of my head and from a couple of clips on youtube. Even though the guns obviously aren't real I think it deserves a page, as they are all faithful representation of real guns. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:55, 13 November 2011 (CST)
Thanks for your quick comments, I understand the initial hesitation. However, just check below screenprints and you will see that indeed the makers did their homework, maybe they even checked IMFDB! Commando552's memory serves him right!
[[Image:TeamAmerica-screenshotexample.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]
I agree that the movie contains a lot of nonsense but I am actually tempted to go ahead, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 16:11, 13 November 2011 (CST)
:And It will be deleted just like last time as the "Weapons" are just whatever generic 1/6th scale guns the directors could find. they are obviously not real. The page has been deleted before and will most likely be removed again. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 16:17, 13 November 2011 (CST)
::The guns in anime and video games aren't real either. The guns aren't generic from what I can see, can identify them all (more so than some of the guns on pages like [[Crysis 2]]). If mods so no then fair enough, but I think it should have a page. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:57, 13 November 2011 (CST)
::: I'm with Commando552 on this one, if it's not eligible because the guns aren't real then all video games and anime should be removed because those guns aren't real they're drawings or digital constructs. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 18:38, 13 November 2011 (CST)

== New or original gun names? ==

When a gun was originally sold under one name but has since changed, which name should be used? A good example is that right now there are [[LaRue Tactical OSR]] and [[LaRue Tactical OBR]] pages. They are the exact same rifle (OSR image is the standard rifle while OBR is tricked out, both versions are currently shown on the LaRue website as the OBR), LaRue was just forced to change the name due to a copyright problem. In this kind of case, which name should be used? I would have just checked other pages to see what the norm is, but my mind is currently drawing a blank to other guns that have changed their name but remained otherwise the same. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:52, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:Oops... I was the one who made the [[LaRue Tactical OBR]] page. I sincerely thought they were different guns, one a Battle Rifle and the other a Sniper Rifle. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

== Sortable Tables ==

Zackmann08 had mentioned about modifying our current table format for weapons and actor pages to a version where the boxes are sortable. A sortable template is already made and can be seen on [[Amitabh Bachchan]]'s page (I've now modified it to look a little more like our current table format). This definitely would be beneficial for the gun pages, but I noticed it takes a little bit longer to load and not sure if users will understand what the sortable icon is for. Would like to get thoughts from admins and users on this before a change is completely made. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 22:18, 16 December 2011 (CST)

:You make a good point about users not knowing what the icon is for. It is in use on wikipedia a lot these days so i think a lot of people are familiar with it and worst case scenario, if they're not then the table is just left in it's default sort. Just my 2 cents on the matter...--[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:54, 16 December 2011 (CST)

::It doesn't work with rowspaned tables (like the ones on the [[Heckler & Koch MP5]] page) so it is a one or the other decision. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:28, 17 December 2011 (CST)

:::another very good point, but how many rowspan tables are really in use? Other than the MP5 page i dont recall seing any others, though i havent really been looking for them. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:37, 17 December 2011 (CST)

::::I've used them a few times, but generally only when there are a number of people from the same show/movie using the same weapon, as I think it looks better than having 10 or so entries with the same title and date in a row. If people decide against the rowspaned tables am happy to get rid of them though, was just my preference. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:50, 17 December 2011 (CST)

:::::I feel ya. They are definitely preferable to listing the same thing over and over but if the choice is between that and sortable tables, personally I think the sortable ones are worth losing the rowspan. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:40, 17 December 2011 (CST)

::::::I like the idea of sortable tables, especially for long pages like [[Beretta 92 pistol series#Beretta 92F/FS|Beretta 92F/FS]] or [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]]. However, I have noticed that currently there's a number of page formats depending on the respective contributor. I may not be so experienced with IMFDB like most of you, but it seems to me that it would make more sense to concentrate on developing a way to create a more uniform page format before we spend time on accepting more 'sexy' features. Pretty much like working on a house and spend time on the roof when the foundations have not been properly laid yet. Take care, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:29, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::I totally agree with [[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]]. I think what we really need is a single page that we can look at that has a template for everything. A section showing how to make a gun page. A section for actors, section for TV Shows, a section for Movies. That way we all know that this is the page everything should be based off of. This would be far better than saying "look at the M1911 page" because even pages like that have inconsistencies with formatting. The special page could even be put in the toolbar on the left side of the page under "toolbox". That would be amazingly helpful. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:57, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:Bunni made a template for gun pages: [[Template:Gun]] That's how a newly created gun page should look like. Of course, the gun specifications sections can be expanded with other stuff, like barrel length (if a gun comes with 2 or more different barrels, like the [[Remington MSR]] for example), country of Origin, Designer and Manufacturer (if it is not in the title of the page, e.g. [[9A-91]]).
:And about the sortable tables: I think it is a bad idea. Why would anyone wanna sort a table on an actor page by the notation or character the actor was playing. Sorting by year is the best option IMHO, on both actor and gun pages. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 11:37, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:: I can see why you wouldn't want to sort by notation, and character would basically result in sorting by movie, but I can see how you would want to sort by what guns an actor has used instead of just what year. Also, one of the benefits of the sortable tables is that some of the older pages that are NOT sorted can be fixed by simply changing the class="wikitable" to class="sortable". As for the template, it does need to be expanded but we also need to find a way to make sure people know it's there and that all pages should follow it. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:17, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::This is proving to be a highly educational discussion for me as a rookie IMFDB user. Actually, this is the first time I learn about the template pages, and to be honest I fear I am not the only one. Instead of searching through the website, how about simply displaying links to the template pages everytime somebody clicks the button to create a new page? I am sure this will lead to increased uniformity and substantially lower the barrier for new people to get started on a page. Taking things one step further, how about the following? If somebody indicates to create a brand new page, a question box is displayed asking e.g. to make a choice between movie, actor, gun etc. so that after this choice the relating template pops up? Again, I am not sure if this is feasible but I am quite interested to hear your feedback, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 14:23, 18 December 2011 (CST)

::::I LIKE THIS IDEA!!! We definitely need to make a page that has all the templates listed. Right now its really hard to track down the templates. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 14:52, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:Search for "<nowiki>Category:Templates</nowiki>" and it will show u all the templates. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 15:20, 18 December 2011 (CST)

::That helps but still that page needs to be publicized better. It also needs to be better explained. How are [[A-Team, The]] or [[MacGyver]] templates? When I create a new page, I find a good page and I copy the 'wiki code' from it into my new page and then just edit the text. My guess is this is what most people do and I feel like that is what we need. A page with dummy titles, names and guns for people to copy to a new page and work from. Thanks for letting me know about the Template page though. Didn't know that was there. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:03, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::I think that Zackmann08 is hitting the nail on the head. Building on above comments, how about the following? On the left side of all pages there's the master menu table in blue ('CATEGORIES/SPECIAL/TOOLBOX'). In 'CATEGORIES' one can choose between Movies/Guns/Actors/etc so why not add something simple like 'Templates for New Pages'? If you click that, you'd see just 7 options for new pages; (1) Movie, (2) TV, (3) Anime, (4) Video, (5) Actor, (6) Gun and (7) Others (for whatever else can be 'templated'). Any choice would lead to one single template with dummy info and a short explanation on how to use it. This way an immediate and easy access to the templates will be realized, rather than (I am sorry to say) searching through several menu's in the Toolbox option and finding dozens of random templates. Interested to know what you guys think, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 05:21, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::::This sounds perfect to me! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:41, 19 December 2011 (CST)

:::::So, any volunteers willing and able to start on an addition to "Categories" with "Templates for New pages"? Am not too familiar with such revisions, but do we need authorization from anybody? --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 09:25, 20 December 2011 (CST)

== Merry Christmas! ==

[[Image:IMFDB 2011 Christmas Card.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
--[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 14:22, 22 December 2011 (CST)

HAHAHA! I love it!

Merry Christmas guys :) --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 16:05, 22 December 2011 (CST)

== Gun Brands Pages ==

I had an interesting idea that I was curious what others thought of. I was thinking it might be helpful to have a page that listed all the guns made by a certain company. For example, a "Smith & Wesson" page that would list all the guns that they have. To clarify, it would only list guns that are on this site. As per the rules this is NOT a gun encyclopedia and gun pages are only on this site if they appear in a movie/tv show/etc. I feel that it could be quite helpful in trying to identify weapons. We could divide the pages into Pistols, Revolvers, Shotguns, Rifles, etc. just like a movie page and set it up as a table perhaps with some of the characteristics listed such as caliber(s), barrel length(s), etc. Would could even have a 'notes' column that list certain characteristics that help to identify it (for example for Taurus 92, "distinguished from the Beretta by its frame-mounted safety").

If this is an idea that people think might be useful, and if an admin will give me approval, I would love to create a trial page for one of the smaller companies. (I'd rather not do S&W to start with if it turns out people don't like it). I could perhaps start with Ruger which has a good number of guns. Please share your thoughts! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:07, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:Sounds like an interesting plan. Thing is that quite often I see a gun and I have a general idea what brand it could be but then I find myself flipping through many gunpages in the IMFDB hoping that the gun I am looking for has been properly registered under that brand's name. In the case of e.g. Smith & Wesson (to name but a brand...) I can imagine such a page to be very useful. Will be following this discussion, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:18, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::Yeah it seems like it would be a good idea.--[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 10:32, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Trial page is up and running! I went ahead and did [[Ruger]]. I threw in a gallery as well. I'm not sure whether it's better have it right after the table or to put it at the bottom of the page or what. Please share all your thoughts on the page! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:23, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:I think there is no need for the tables '''and''' galleries. Just simply put the caliber after the gun's name in the gallery. Like: "Ruger LCP - .380 ACP". Sorting gun's by type if definitely good, and seeing the thumbnail of the gun's will really speed up the IDing process (at least for me it will). The whole idea of these pages is great, considering that some guns (mostly Russians) are listed without the manufacturers' names. If more pages like this will spawn, we will need a "Gun Manufacturers" category, or something like that. I definitely support this idea, but the mods will decide. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:58, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::I completely agree. The only thing is that some of these guns have 5+ calibers which could be cumbersome in the Gallery format... It would be great to have a 'Gun Manufacturers' category. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:25, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::I also added the [[Barrett]] & [[FN Herstal]] pages. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 14:26, 23 December 2011 (CST)[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:44, 23 December 2011 (CST)
:::You could put them in table but have the far right column be a picture (put in <nowiki>[[Image:file_name.jpg|200px]]</nowiki>). Would take up more vertical room than a gallery, but you could then include calibre, magazine size (helpfull for identifying different 5/6 shot cylinder revolvers, and differences between double/single stack handguns for example), year introduced (which would also help with ruling stuff out for IDs in older films/TV) etc. I suppose a notes catagory could also ,be usefull, say if a gun is available in multiple finishes and stuff like that. I think these pages are a good idea, but I think having the specifications section is a bit irrelevent for a company, I would just tag it on the end of "About". --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:27, 23 December 2011 (CST)

This is what you mean, Commando?
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-align:left; font-size: 95%"
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="300"|'''Weapon'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Caliber(s)'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="250"|'''Capacity'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Introduced'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Image'''
|-
|[[Remington MSR]]|| .338 Lapua Magnum<br>.338 Norma Magnum<br>.300 Winchester Magnum<br>7.62x51mm NATO || 5, 7, 10|| Late 2000s||[[Image:RemingtonMSR.jpg|200px]]
|-
|[[XM2010|Remington XM2010 ESR]]|| .300 Winchester Magnum || 5|| 2010||[[Image:XM2010.jpg|200px]]
|-
|}
You are right BTW, the year and capacity can help a lot in IDing. [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 15:58, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:THAT LOOKS AWESOME!!! I am sold... That is how I am doing it. Next question, what do we want to do about variants? For example with the [[FN FAL]] do we also list the [[FN LAR]] on the [[FN Herstal]] page or just the [[FN FAL]] and figure if you are trying to identify the gun you will go to the FN FAL page and look at the variants? Same goes for the [[FN SCAR]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:28, 23 December 2011 (CST)
::Yeah, that's what I mean. I think this is more usefull than just a gallery, and also it would be a place where sortable tables would definitely be useful, as you could sort the guns by name or chronologically. For a while I've been meaning to do a table of all the Colt AR-15 variants for my own use, but would be good for the Colt page. AR-15s are kind of a special case as their are so many variants that are very similar at first glance, so would include more columns (like upper/lower receiver type, barrel length and profile, bayonet lug, stuff like that) so someone who didn't know much about different variants could sort the columns and work out what a gun is. Regardless if it ends up going on the Colt page, I'm going to make it and put it on my user page to see how it turns out.
::As for different variants I would list them as they can look noticeably different, as is the case with the FAR and the LAR (these are pretty distinctly different weapons, more of a grey area would be listing different FAL variants such as the 50.00, 50.61 and 50.63). With guns like the SCAR, I think the split should just be between the H and the L, not the different barrel lengths. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:43, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:::Fair enough. The other idea that I had was to add an additional column called "variants". This would be great for weapons like the MP5 which all have the same base. Got the idea from this wikipedia page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Heckler_%26_Koch_products Heckler and Koch]. Glad to see so many people are taking a liking to this idea. I defiantly want to make it happen. Also, the AR-15 idea is a GREAT one. Perhaps a 1911 page as well. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:56, 23 December 2011 (CST)
::::You talking like one page for ALL 1911 variants, or seperate pages for each 1911 company? But then how would we handle, say, an SW1911? Would it be on the S&W page, or the 1911 page? Or both?--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 23:31, 23 December 2011 (CST)
:I've continued working on the three trial pages ([[Ruger]], [[Barrett]] & [[FN Herstal]]). I have noticed that A LOT of these guns are missing the most basic information (no specifications). If anyone is looking for a task, that would be a great one. I will do my part once I get these pages fully up. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:32, 23 December 2011 (CST)
Loving the idea, I am considering making a SIG-Sauer trial page with the basics only, then going back later and adding in lesser known stuff. But I want to see how these pages come along!--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 23:31, 23 December 2011 (CST)

'''Please keep in mind that the mods will decide. DO NOT create additional gun manufacturer pages until an approval comes from them. It will be a waste of time if they delete them later.''' - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 02:26, 24 December 2011 (CST)
::That is why I said wanted to see what happened to these pages first.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 14:19, 24 December 2011 (CST)
:Another thing that would be great, is if anyone wants to go through the trial pages (([[Ruger]], [[Barrett]], [[Heckler & Koch]] & [[FN Herstal]]) and make sure that each weapon has specifications on its page that would be great. As i was creating these pages I noticed that most of the weapons were lacking the most basic specifications and info. (This could be yet another use for these pages!) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:08, 24 December 2011 (CST)

:::We had this discussion in the forum a long time ago, and the consensus was that it was NOT a useful means of classifying weapons on the site. Hence why I deleted the page originally. I'm still not sure it's all that useful. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 08:58, 24 December 2011 (CST)

::::I respectfully disagree. For someone like me who is a still a novice with guns it is exceptionally helpful when identifying weapons. This will be particularly true when it comes to things like the Smith and Wesson revolvers. It is often easy to identify the revolver is a Smith and Wesson but harder to know which model. If there is a single page that list all the Smith and Wesson revolvers it saves us from having to go through page by page. I just find it is so helpful to have one location where you can see a picture and the '''basics''' of the possible weapons. If it is helpful for some of us is it okay to leave these up? I will personally make sure that the pages are done in a professional looking manner and are not sloppily thrown together. I truly believe that (as long as they are done in the proper manner) they can make a fantastic addition to this already awesome website. (ok so that was a bit of kissing up but it's true, this site freaking rocks! :-) ) I'm also using this 'project' as an excuse to update many of these weapons so that their pages are in the correct format with specifications and descriptions.
::::I appreciate that I am still a new guy here and I '''really DO NOT''' want to be that guy who joins and says "nice thing you got going here but you should really change it because I know better." I DO NOT know better, please don't take this in that light. I am merely saying that there are a lot of people who would like to contribute but don't have the knowledge that some of you experts do. I think that this addition would help us novices contribute. I welcome your feedback. Oh, and a Merry Christmas/Happy Chanukah to everyone! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 09:21, 24 December 2011 (CST)

I propose changing 'introduced' to 'produced' and having it be a to and from date. Basically how long the weapon was in productions for. 1995-2005 rather than just 1995 for example. Any thoughts?? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:24, 25 December 2011 (CST)

Would love to hear some feedback from the admins on this project. I would like to continue with it but don't want to do a bunch of work and then have the pages removed. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 09:13, 26 December 2011 (CST)

Looks good. I'm a mod here. I really like the Colt page. The S&W page is going to be an intensive piece of labor for you. I agree with bunni. We need a category for these new pages. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 16:29, 27 December 2011 (CST)

I'm a mod as well and I really like what I'm seeing. This will be a lot of work but I think it will be quite an invaluable resource once it is finished, as long as it is done well. Kudos. - [[User:Speakeasy804|Speakeasy804]] 21:51, 6 January 2012 (CST)

I started the [[SIG-Sauer]] page, and am about 3/4 done. Any help would be appreciated! Oh, and if anyone knows how to change the name of a page I would greatly appreciate for it to be renamed ''SIG-Sauer Inc.''--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 17:33, 16 January 2012 (CST)

:[[SIG-Sauer]] is fine. According to Bunni we are not using "inc" or "LLC" in the page titles. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:34, 16 January 2012 (CST)

::That's fine, I wasn't sure if it was necessary or not.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 20:19, 16 January 2012 (CST)

== Battle Los Angeles ==

I have a question that I cant seem to get a good bead on, in the movie Battle Los Angeles Aaron Eckhart is seen using an m9 Beretta as his pistol,which I know is the main side arm used by US military forces. However, it was my understanding that the Marines used the 1911 as their sidearm and were the only branch to keep it as the main side arm. Eckhart's character in the movie is a grizzled old vet and had just put in for his 20 at the beginning of the movie meaning that he must have joined back in 1990-1991 and it would make sense to me why he would hold on to something like that. Either way please let me know what you got, thanks NavyBoyd
:For movie-specific discussions, please go to [[http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Talk:Battle:_Los_Angeles|the associated talk page]].--[[User:PistolJunkie|PistolJunkie]] 19:57, 23 December 2011 (CST)

== Gun Page Templates ==

As part of the 'Gun Brands Pages' project (see above), I am also trying to make sure that each weapon included has specifications listed on its page. I am using the following as my template. If anyone thinks it is missing anything, please let me know. (Note that I made it a subheading with 3 '=' instead of the normal 2 '=' so that it wouldn't be its own category. normally it would just have 2.) I personally don't feel that Muzzle Velocity or effective range are necessary but I am up for input and critique. Just want to make sure I am doing this right! Merry Christmas everyone!
Oh and under FireModes I am including DA,SA,DAO,DA/SA if applicable. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:38, 25 December 2011 (CST)
<br><br><-- start template-->
===Specifications===
(year - year)

* '''Type:''' Handgun/Revolver/Submachine Gun/Sniper Rifle/etc.

* '''Caliber(s):'''

* '''Weight:''' lb ( kg) (empty)

* '''Length:''' in ( mm)

* '''Barrel length:''' in ( mm)

* '''Capacity:'''

* '''Fire Modes:''' Safe/Semi-Auto/Full-Auto (950rounds/min)

-----
<--end template-->
:Another question that one of the veterans can help me out with. With guns that have Variations ([[Heckler & Koch P2000]] or [[Heckler & Koch USP]] for example), should each subcategory have its own specifications with the different length, capacity, etc. For example should the [[Heckler & Koch P2000]] have just one specifications section for the page or should there be one for the H&K P2000 and one for the H&K P2000SK. (This is the way I did the page but I want to make sure that this is ok. If I'm supposed to just do one section I will gladly correct it.) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:03, 25 December 2011 (CST)

== I can't create a new thread in the forum ==

I logged into the forum and tried to create a new thread, but I get a message that says I don't have permission to access the page. I'm using a different username than I have used before, so is my account "awaiting activation?"--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 11:06, 1 January 2012 (CST)
:I had the same problem a few days ago. You want to talk to [[User:Bunni|Bunni]]. He'll fix it for ya. Happy new year. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:28, 1 January 2012 (CST)
::Thanks for your help. I followed your advice and left a message for Bunni over a week ago but he hasn't yet responded. Has he not been around lately?--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 10:12, 13 January 2012 (CST)

== I think it's time to end the silencer/suppressor debate ==

I see this a lot, people correct other people "It's a suppressor, not a silencer. It doesn't silence the gun" and I think it really needs to stop. Way back in 1910, the first silencer was patented by Hiram Maxim as the '''SILENCER'''. Way back then, they weren't even that good compared to today's because the technology has been advanced on yet they were still called silencers. Them having the name silencer is just a name, after all there is a model of the Ithaca 37 called "Deer Slayer". It's a inanimate object which cannot slay deer. It can be used to kill deer however but the name doesn't fit it unless it operated on it's own to shoot deer. There are some people named Rose or Diamond but they aren't a flower or an expensive jewel. My point is with this is that it's just a name. Even today, the BATFE calls them silencers on the paper work and many companies that make them call them silencers. There is even a company called SilencerCO.

The reason why a lot of people call them suppressor is because in the 1970s the magazine, Soldier of Fortune, started calling them suppressors and giving the reason that I stated in the first sentence. Most people that I've seen that actually own them call them silencers and they have most likely done their research on them.

In conclusion, calling them silencers is not wrong and neither is calling them suppressors. You call them either and you're right. It's when you claim that silencer is the improper term. Silencer is just a name, it's the way it is.
--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 10:20, 9 January 2012 (CST)

: I personally prefer "suppressor", it's a nice, ''woody'', sort of word. --[[User:Milkovich|Milkovich]] [[File:Milkovich Signature.jpg|20px|frameless|link=User:Milkovich|]] 13:51, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:: Yes, "silencer" is a name, but it's a misnomer. "Silencer" suggests absolutely no sound is produced when a shot is fired; "Suppressor" properly states that the sound will be muffled instead of completely silenced. It's the same as saying bullet-resistant instead of bulletproof. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 17:52, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:::I don't see anyone complaining that their shotgun doesn't kill deer on it's own. IT'S A NAME and it's correct. .223 fires a .224 caliber bullet, are you going to complain about that too?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:37, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::::I agree. I think "Suppressor" sounds more accurate and professional. If it were a silencer, there would be little or no sound at all, which unless you use a suppressed .22 with half loads and a plastic bottle, is impossible, and even THAT makes a sound. I say we go with Suppressor.--[[User:Scattergun]]

:::::While "Silencer" is correct in general terms, the term "suppressor" is preferred largely because of the Hollywood concept of the "magic silencer" that literally makes a gunshot into the sound of a kitten sneezing. The "suppressor" term was coined to give a more realistic idea of what the device actually does; it suppresses the sound, it doesn't silence it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:05, 14 January 2012 (CST)

== NCIS: LA gun change? ==

The latest episode of NCIS: LA "Exit Strategy" the guns don't see to be the normal Sig 228s. The guns are still Sigs, but with rails, and Deeks was not carrying his normal Beretta. Deeks' weapon may have been the same S&W used in the episode "Empty Quiver". -Tucker

== Single or Double-Stack 1911? ==

Which is a better 1911 variant to have? A single stack or a double stack magazine. I heard somewhere that a 14-shot 1911 is more prone to jamming but I'm not sure. The reason is I am currently writing a script for an independent movie that me and my class will make and I have access to all kinds of guns, both blank-adapted and Japanese flash cap versions, and the main character is to carry a 1911 .45 and I was wondering what the more professional choice would be to carry.
:Personally I would go for a Kimber Custom II TLE or a Springfield Armoury TRP, both are single stackers. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 12:58, 13 January 2012 (CST)

== Novel guns? ==

I know this may seem like a stupid idea, but should we include guns that feature in books? I have several books in my bookcase that go into great detail about guns, albeit sometimes they call sub-machine guns machine guns for some reason. (Seriously, how can you mix it up?) I'm new here, please go easy, but please give it some thought. They could either be on the book cover or featured in print inside. I know it would be pointless to include a screenshot of the text, but there are some pages on IMFDB that are just lists of guns and pictures of the guns themselves.
Alasdair

:Check out the [[Rules, Standards and Principles]] page. It will help set your straight. Good thing for new users to read (I found this out the hard way just a few weeks ago when I joined). --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:35, 15 January 2012 (CST)

Ah, I see. Thanks. Alasdair.

== Manufacturer Pages ==

With more people starting to work on Manufacturer Pages, I'm working on making a template for the pages ([[Manufacturer Template]]). I am going to add a link to it from the <nowiki>[[Category:Manufacturer]]</nowiki> page. I figure this will help to make sure that they all stay consistent. (Note: not all of the pages that I have already made conform to the standards that I listed on the template, I will be fixing that in the next few days.) My goal is to make sure that these pages look professional and are useful! If anyone, particularly admins, has things that would like to add to the pages or to correct with future pages, please edit the template accordingly. Thanks! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:41, 19 January 2012 (CST)

== Glock Manufacturer's Page ==

I was getting ready to make the Glock page for the new Manufacturers category and ran into a small problem. The new page would ideally be called ''Glock'' but that is already taken by the [[Glock]] page which has all their guns. I definitely think this page would be helpful (at least I know it would I'd find it useful) as it will help you decide whether you are looking at a G17 or a G21. I welcome any and all ideas and suggestions. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 17:54, 19 January 2012 (CST)
:The actual company is trademarked in all capitals as GLOCK so you could do that. Either that or you could put "manufacturer" in brackets after it, or make this the one exception where you put on the crap after the name, in this case "Ges.m.b.H.". If not that, I don't think a manufacturer page is as important for Glocks as other brands, as they are all already on the same page. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:05, 19 January 2012 (CST)
::All good ideas. I'll prolly just go with (manufacturer). I agree that its not as important but it could still be super useful. I think I'm going to add a 'frame' column like we did with the S&W revolvers. This time it will have "Compact" "Standard", "SubCompact", etc.. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 18:29, 19 January 2012 (CST)

== Taurus ==

I am in the process of redoing all the [[Taurus]] gun pages. Giving them all specifications, converting to wiki-table, etc. If there are any Taurus aficionados in the house who are willing and able to fill in the information that I am having trouble finding (mainly production dates), that would be great! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:15, 20 January 2012 (CST)

== Beretta ==

I'm in the process of making the [[Beretta]] page. My understanding is that for Semi-Automatic pistols we DO NOT include "Model" in the page title, [[Beretta 418]] for example. There are a few pages that are not consistent with this pattern. Just want to make sure that they are all named correctly and follow the same rules. Could an admin look into this? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 23:52, 20 January 2012 (CST)

== Proper name for CZ ==

It has been brought to my attention that the new Manufacturer page for [[CZ]] may not be properly named. The full name of the manufacturer is "Česká zbrojovka Uherský Brod". I am hesistant to use this name for a couple reasons. 1) Its kind of a pain to type on a 'standard' keyboard. 2) Most people (I THINK) know the company as "CZ". One possible compromise I'm considering is renaming the page "CZ (Česká zbrojovka Uherský Brod) and having "CZ" redirect there. I would love to hear some thoughts on the matter. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:45, 25 January 2012 (CST)
:I would use the full name with a redirect, but if you are calling it CZUB rather than Česká zbrojovka, that would exclude at least a couple of guns, such as the vz. 24 which was made by Československá zbrojovka Brno. I'm no expert on CZ, but it was my understanding that any words after the "Česká zbrojovka" part were just different factories, or is this wrong? While talking about proper names for gun pages, what should the page be called if the manufacturer has changed its name or merged? For example, when I made the [[Royal Small Arms Factory]] page I used the original name rather than Royal Ordnance. However I was going to make a Denel Land Systems page, which was originally called Lyttleton Engineering Works, but the Denel name is much more commonly known so didn't know what to use. Any suggestions for a general rule on this sort of thing? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:23, 25 January 2012 (CST)
::I think we definitely need a [[CZ]] expert to take a look at this page... Any volunteers??? As for the different names, first and foremost, whatever the page ends up being, there should be redirects form all the others. So for example [[Royal Ordnance]] should redirect to the [[Royal Small Arms Factory]]. Also, whatever the final name of the page ends up being, there should be a short explanation about the fact that it is "Also Known As ______" or "Formally Known As ____". As for a general rule, while I think it would be best to go with what the company is most commonly known as, in the end, that is a matter of opinion. Personally, I think the rule of thumb should be to go with what the company is currently known as (use the company website?) and have other names redirect there. Just my 2 cents on the matter.
::As a side note, while talking about redirect, I'm also trying to set up redirects for these pages that will help newcomers when searching the site. For example, if you search S&W now, instead of getting a page listing all the times that that the letters 'S' and 'W' appear on a page, you are now taken to the [[Smith & Wesson]] page. Just food for thought. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:36, 25 January 2012 (CST)
what exactly do you want to know about the CZ? I grew up in czechoslovakia, we used to carry these handguns in the army.

==A question about a bolt ==

Off-topic, but could anyone ID this bolt? http://www.forgottenweapons.com/mystery-bolt
Thanks, a relatively new and inexperienced user.

==Site Policy On 'Made Up' Weapons==
Could someone please clarify the site's policy on guns fabricated for films and videogames? I've edited articles on the Killzone games in the past only to have the articles taken down altogether because the guns featured aren't real. Now I'd accept that as fair enough, except other articles (e.g. [[Alien: Resurrection]] and [[Perfect Dark]]) deal with non-existent weapons at some length and nobody complains, even though some of the weapons they describe feature far ''less'' in common with real guns than the Killzone games' weapons did; at least many of those featured parts that were readily identifiable as belonging to real-world weapons. By deleting one and sparing the others, you're creating something of a double standard--[[User:Leigh Burne|Leigh Burne]] 09:56, 31 January 2012 (CST)

== Gun Title Template ==

Is there any way to get rid of the '''<nowiki><br clear=all></nowiki>''' that results from using the Gun Title template? I noticed that it can cause some problems when the gun in question has multiple images as there will be a bunch of white space before the list of occurrences. For an example of what I mean look at [[Smith & Wesson Model 610]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:14, 1 February 2012 (CST)

== Gangster Squad ==

Since I can't create a thread in the forum I decided to post this here.

The upcoming movie Gangster Squad will be released this year, and someone managed to record scenes being filmed, then posted the videos on Youtube. A couple of the videos feature shootouts.

This first one shows the "Gangster Squad" involved in a firefight and has a lot of M1 Thompson action:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNlUBrd0uTc&feature=endscreen&NR=1 Gangster Squad 1]

The second video shows what I'm assuming are gangster-types, which is shot too far away to make positive ID's on all the weapons, but I think I know what most of them are. Two of them are using the usual Thompsons, but the guy kneeling between the cars seems to have a Sten, judging by the way he's holding it. There's another guy firing an smg, which due to the way he's holding it and it's rate of fire, I think is either an MP-40 or M-3. It's impossible to tell because he's obscured by a car. I'm pretty sure the guy up in the building is using a Lewis Gun.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xf0iEgtzBw&feature=related Gangster Squad 2]

I love these period crime movies, and this one looks really promising. What I'm seeing in these videos suggests there will be some great shootouts in this movie, and I just hope that's what we actually get in the final cut--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 09:04, 2 February 2012 (CST)

== How do i add upload an image here? ==

I have gun to add, how do i add an image of it?

Also, how do i create a user page for myself?

Sorry if i am in the wrong section. If so, then please guide me to the right section.

:Look to the left; under Toolbox is upload file. To edit your user page, go to the top of the screen, where it has your username, followed by My Talk, My Preferences, ect. Click your username (red means there is nothing there yet).--[[User:Jackbel|Jackbel]] 19:38, 4 February 2012 (CST)

== Fictional Airsoft Guns ==

Just noticed that on the [[Milkor MGL]] page there is an entry for the [[Milkor_MGL#CAW_40mm_Grenade_Launcher|CAW 40mm Grenade Launcher]], an airsoft grenade launcher. It seems random that it is on this page as it is a fictional design that shares basically nothing with the Milkor. Are there many other fictional airsoft variants that appear in stuff (only one I can think of off the top of my head is that weird AKS-74U variant that is in Call of Duty), if so is it worth creating a page for fictional airsoft guns that do not have a real world equivalent? I previously made a similar page for [[Blank Fire Only Guns]] that are not based on any specific live fire weapon, would be like that. Anyone have any thoughts on this? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:56, 7 February 2012 (CST)

- Personally, I think if it resembles the weapon, even if its fictional, it should share the page at the bottom. After all, the Bruni 1911 and the Bruni Python aren't real guns but they share a page with their real world Colt counterparts. At least thats how I feel about it. -[[User:Scattergun]]

:That is different to what I am talking about though. The very reason that the two guns you mentioned are where they are (at the bottom of the live fire equivalent page) rather than on the blank fire page is that they are clearly based on real world guns. The Bruni Olympic 6 however isn't based on any particular real world design and is just a generic revolver, hence it being on the blank fire page. My idea was that airsoft guns that are not based on any particular gun, such as the grenade launcher I mentioned above, could be put on one page for ID and listing purposes. My question really was are there enough "unique", for lack of a better term, airsoft guns around to make a page like this worth it? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:10, 7 February 2012 (CST)

== Naming conventions for SIG guns ==

Now that I have finished the S&W pages, I am moving on to revamping the SIG Sauer pages. I wanted to get feedback, particularly from admins, about the consisten disagreement about SIG vs SIG Sauer vs SIG-Sauer and see if we could come to a consensus. Some of the page have the full '''SIG-Sauer''' in the title ([[SIG-Sauer P220 pistol series]] & [[SIG-Sauer P230]]) while other simply have '''SIG''' ([[SIG P210]] & [[SIG SG 540]]). If for no other reason than to make sure that FUTURE pages are done correctly, which is the proper format? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:49, 9 February 2012 (CST)
:It's not a matter of shorthand, the correct title depends on the firearm in question. The pistols with SIG-Sauer as the title were made by SIG-Sauer Inc., while the ones with SIG as the title were made by SIG independently, not with Sauer. Generally, the older guns (P210 & 510) are made by SIG only or Swiss Arms (which refers to themselves as SIG), while newer guns are SIG-Sauer. What I suppose I'm trying to say is that the titles are accurate as-is. As to whether the admins want SIG-Sauer or SIG Sauer is beyond me, although as they are two companies joined together I'm pretty sure there would be a hyphen.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 22:27, 9 February 2012 (CST)
::OOOOOHHHHHHHHH!! That makes so much more sense.... I never actually realized that SIG and Sauer were 2 separate companies that merged. Thank you SO much for that explanation!
::Given that, disregard my initial question! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 00:17, 10 February 2012 (CST)
:::Having said that, I still think all of the page that say "SIG-Sauer" should get rid of the hyphen and say "SIG Sauer", as this is how both the Swiss/German and American companies spell it. If there is an actual reason for adding in a hyphen then fair enough, but has always seemed a bit random to me. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:17, 10 February 2012 (CST)
Taken directly from the [[SIG-Sauer P220 pistol series]] page: ''NOTE: In the past, some IMFDB users have mis-spelled "SIG-Sauer" as "Sig Sauer". "Sig Sauer" is not the correct spelling; "SIG" is an acronym for Swiss Industrial Society ("Schweizerische Industrie Gesellschaft " in German), and thus, all three letters should be capitalized. Also, it is preferred that IMFDB users put a hyphen between "SIG" and "Sauer".''--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 12:23, 12 February 2012 (CST)
:I've seen the message that putting the hyphen in is the preferred method on imfdb, but I don't understand why this is. As I said, neither the US or swiss/german companies use the hyphen so why do we? If it is a formatting reason or something technical that I don't understand then fair enough, but otherwise I think it should be deleted. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:09, 12 February 2012 (CST)
::I have to agree with Commando here... Both Wikipedia and http://www.sigsauer.com/ list it as '''SIG Sauer'''. Why was the decision made to include the Hyphen here? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:36, 12 February 2012 (CST)

== Television wikitable ==

Up until now I have been using the following table for any pages that I convert from list format to table format:
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-align:left; font-size: 95%"
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="250"|'''Show Title / Episode'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Actor'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Character'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Note'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Air Date'''
|-
| ''[[CSI: Miami]]'' / "Down to the Wire" || [[Tom Sizemore]] || Private Investigator Kurt Rossi || || 2002 - Present
|-
|}
I was considering modifying this to give '''Episode''' its own column. I wanted to see what people thought of this idea...
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;" border="1" style="border: 1px solid #D0E7FF; background-color:#ffffff; text-align:left; font-size: 95%"
|-bgcolor=#D0E7FF
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Show Title'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Episode(s)'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="150"|'''Actor'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="200"|'''Character'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Note'''
!align=center bgcolor=#D0E7FF width="100"|'''Air Date'''
|-
| ''[[CSI: Miami]]'' || "Down to the Wire" || [[Tom Sizemore]] || Private Investigator Kurt Rossi || || 2002 - Present
|-
|}
Any feedback is appreciated. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 01:26, 11 February 2012 (CST)
:I've been combining the episode and note columns. I think I picked that up from Ben. That always made sense for me because episode info or notes are sometimes missing or unnecessary, while Show Title is ALWAYS present. I've always tried to supply episode info, and it could get a little tight when it's in there with the show name. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 01:42, 11 February 2012 (CST)

== Sako vs SAKO ==

I want to come to another consensus here... Is it SAKO or Sako? I.E. [[SAKO 85 Hunter]] vs [[Sako TRG-21]]. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:40, 11 February 2012 (CST)
:It's an acronym (Suojeluskuntain Ase- ja Konepaja Oy), which would suggest all caps. If you go to the US website, the page is titled "SAKO Finland." Strangely enough, if you go to the "Company" link, they refer to themselves as just "Sako." --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 15:36, 11 February 2012 (CST)

== Companies w/ one single product ==

I have always wondered, what about those companies that have only one single product, like AMSD, Rafael, DRS Precisions,... (I am sure there is more) Can they have a Manufacturer page or not? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 06:53, 12 February 2012 (CST)
:Can they? Yes... Should they? No... Just my humble opinion... --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:49, 12 February 2012 (CST)

== Featured Articles ==

Question for our admins regarding the featured articles on the main page. What is the process for becoming a featured article? I know that for obvious reasons (preventing vandalism, etc.) the [[Template:FeaturedArticle2]] is locked, but is there a way for us non-admins to suggest new articles? Could we perhaps set something up whereby non-admins could post an addition in the discussion page for [[Template:FeaturedArticle2]] and if an admin approves of the addition, it could then be added into the mix? I really do love the random articles that pop up on the front page but as a very frequent visitor, seeing the same images over and over starts to get a little boring... Even just changing the images for a given "Featured Article" would be nice. For example, keeping [[The Unit]] (one of the best articles on the site) as a featured article but choosing 2 different images to be displayed. Any thoughts? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:34, 13 February 2012 (CST)

== Wannabe Indie game dev has some questions ==

I'm looking into making a simple target range simulator, most likely in a software like Unity3d or Coppercube which i have experience in. I am however unsure if entire realism is a good or possibly bad move, not only for game-play, but also because I feel it wouldn't have that... special feeling of a video game, when you play a role playing game for example, they all have their own mood. Pokemon is not Final Fantasy is not The Elder Scrolls. My main concern is how all target range simulator's I've played always go graphics realism, but the shooting mechanics tend to be surreal. This makes it not very fun for many people, people who like goals in their games get to set high scores, but not much else. People who possess firearm knowledge are easily ticked off by the fact that it is trying to be real, but lacks true realism due to all sorts of game-play errors. So while this may seem far fetched, my idea is simple. Mix a realistic (game-play) target range with surreal and almost child-like simple 3d graphics and a basic plot. For those familiar with the concepts in Pokemon, the player character has two primary goals, to collect info on all the monsters, and to defeat all the gym leaders and then the elite four. Target ranges would be like gyms, each has people who you can challenge to accuracy, fastest shot, and other contests of skill. While traveling from range to range, you can collect more firearms, not in grass, but from vendors and helping people with small side-quests, etc. I doubt this kind of a game would receive much, if any audience, particularly being that it's too serious and gun-friendly in content for most children (or more specifically, their parents) to buy, and it's far too childish in graphics for Adults. It's a happy middle where it's a game i would personally love to play, and hopefully so would a few others out there somewhere. All in all, I think a target range and competition based collection RPG with a heavy emphasis on gameplay and fun while still maintaining key aspects of gun culture would be a unique game. (things like policing your brass to be reused with powder and appropriate caliber bullets as a cheaper way to procure and load ammunition, maybe even allowing you to tweak the amount of powder that way). It's hard to explain the whole concept as I haven't nailed every little thing down yet. I was planning on starting the project on a smaller scale, then slowly adding more. So is this a good idea or am i barking up the wrong tree? I'd love to do full realism, but I honestly want the game to be atleast partially fun or stylized. (I am not looking for help making this game, I merely want feedback on the ideas) (I also hope I did not break anything by posting this, I am unfamiliar with wiki editing, and I am relying on your guides.) --[[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 12:31, 18 February 2012 (CST)

:First thing: please post "I am not a bot" after this message before you post anything else on this wiki. Your message seems a little...out of place, and I want to check it's not automated spam. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:44, 18 February 2012 (CST)

::Not a bot, Sorry for any confusion based on the ludicrous idea and my unusual name choice. I couldn't find any other place where i could... Oh. you have a forum. How did i miss that? Sorry. Seems so obvious now that it's glaring at me on the left. And now I forgot to sign. --[[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 14:07, 18 February 2012 (CST)

::Email confirmed on forums, but now Posting Rules: You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts... Whaaa? --[[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 14:12, 18 February 2012 (CST)

:::Unfortunately the automatic approvals don't work for some reason, you'll need to leave a message on [[User:Bunni]]'s talk page to get approved. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:06, 23 February 2012 (CST)

== Top Shot ==

For all you [[Top Shot]] fans, we have a new viewer of IMFDB. I just got re-tweeted by Colby Donaldson... He's checking out the page. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 21:16, 22 February 2012 (CST)
:Haha, that's great!--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 21:18, 22 February 2012 (CST)

== SOCOM 4 ==
Anyone agree it would would a great idea to add Socom 4 with the other SOCOM games in the video game category?--[[User:Commandoninja137|Commandoninja137]] 21:28, 23 February 2012 (CST)

== CSI ==

I am in the process of trying to redo the [[CSI]] pages. There are a LOT of guns used in these series. I feel like they deserve as much attention as the [[NCIS]] pages which are awesome at the moment. If anyone has any of the seasons on DVD and is interested in helping that would be awesome. I just finished [[CSI: NY - Season 7]] and am preparing to do season 6. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 22:46, 24 February 2012 (CST)

== New "Current" template ==

So we already have a number of awesome templates for labeling pages. The '''Upcoming''' template for stuff that hasn't been released yet. The '''Work in Progress''' template for pages that someone is currently working on. Anyone have any thoughts on making a new template for pages that are currently being updated? For example, the current season of [[NCIS]] or the current season of [[Hawaii Five-0]]. There not exactly "upcoming" because the upcoming template specifically says "all images are from trailers" and they aren't exactly a work in progress... Just a thought. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:20, 29 February 2012 (CST)

== New category: "Containing Unidentified Firearm"? ==

I was just wondering if it would make sense to create a new category "Containing Unidentified Firearm" for movies that contain a gun that cannot be identified by the page creator. This way, anybody (like me...) who gets a kick out of identifying a gun that other people could not, can very efficiently assist others to complete pages. If you guys think it's a good idea, any suggestions how to create/promote this category? Thanks for any comments, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 15:43, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:I was thinking about that just last night... I think its a GREAT idea! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:32, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
::Great! Could you advise on the following; (1) what would be a good name? (2) how to create that category? and (3) how can I get other users to start using the category? Look forward to hear from you, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 16:49, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:::I would advise talking to a few admins before doing anything else. We wanna get feedback from them before proceeding. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 17:38, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
::::A good name for this category might be "Movies with unidentified guns" or "Featuring unknown weapons" or something like that. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 19:16, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:::::I agree that something like this would be a good idea. Something to bear in mind though, there are a lot of pages with unidentified guns on this site, most of the time because they are only seen partially, briefly, from a distance or in poor lighting, or just due to the fact that they may be "generic" looking (I bet there are a hell of a lot of pages on here that say "unidentified revolver"). With most of these guns it will be impossible to get a firm ID so the tag will remain there forever, meaning that if someone wanted to try and be helpful and ID a few guns 99% of them would be a vaguely pistol shaped shadow (if it was a chronological list this would be less of a problem but categories are alphabetised). I think a better solution might be to have a discussion page somewhere where people can post caps of unidentified guns they have found whilst building pages, adding the new unidentified gun at the top of the page. This way you would be able to periodically purge the guns that are unidentifiable (e.g. speck in the distance) and would allow discussion between people to help ID the guns. I think it would also be a more successful way of getting unknown guns identified, as if you are good at IDing guns you can just watch this hypothetical page and see whenever a new unidentified gun crops up, as opposed to with a category where you don't know (as for as I know) when something has been added to it. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 20:37, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
Commando makes a good point. I propose a middle ground. There is a difference between "'''I''' cannot identify this gun" and "this gun cannot be identified". A gun that is only seen for a split second may not be identifiable and may simply be called an "unknown" revolver/pistol/etc. Pages that have those types of guns would NOT fall under this category. On the other hand, if you are working on a page and dont know what some of the guns are, you can add the tag and that will be a clue to some of our more experienced members to swoop in and help out. I'm in the process of capping all 20+ seasons of the 3 [[CSI]]s and there are a LOT of guns (particularly revolvers) that I can't identify but from time to time senior members come in and identify them. It would be great to tag these pages until either a) all guns are identified or b) a determination is made that 1 or more guns simply cannot be identified from the images provided. Basically I look at this as a variation of the WorkInProcess template. The page is done, all guns are uploaded, but not everything has been identified. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:56, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
:Check out the template... [[Template:Unidentified]] --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 21:44, 11 March 2012 (CDT)
::As long as it was only used for guns that could be identified if you knew what they were rather than guns you don't see properly it would probably be helpful. Still, would be nice if there was some way of doing it chronologically so you could see when a new thing with unidentified guns is added. Just throwing it out there, here is another possible image to use for the unidentified guns template. I think it looks more like a question mark and is actually made from real weapons (a Korobov TKB-022 and a No. 74 sticky bomb). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:06, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
::[[File:Question mark 2.jpg|thumb|50px|none|]]
:::AWWW but i spent so much time making that quesiton mark just right!!! Grrr... Yorus is better tho... :-p --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 12:29, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
I like the idea and the templates, but rather than make it too complicated trying to get the question mark perfect, what if we just put a gun overlaying a simple, perfectly recognizable question mark. I like the idea of making the gun into a question mark, but I really have to look in order to see it on those. If I had any idea how to make one, I would.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 15:59, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
:I don't mind if the question mark gun thing isn't used, in fact a regular blacked out background photo of a gun would be better as would be more in keeping with the other templates, but what is the perfect "unknown" gun that the majority of people cannot identify? [http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:Gun_Cylon_stunt.jpg This]? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:02, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
::We could use something like that, or what about a blurry outline of a gun in front of a question mark? I think that the question mark makes the template identifiable, rather than just the words 'Unidentified Firearm' across the middle.--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 18:02, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
:::I like [[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]]'s idea. We definatly want to keep the question mark up there. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:05, 12 March 2012 (CDT)
::::Since the majority of unidentified guns I've seen are revolvers, why not make it a S&W Model 27 or a Colt Official Police (or some other revolver... I dislike the idea of using a weird gun for some reason). Maybe make it a Vz 58? It looks like an AK to the untrained eye, and would be mistaken for such if not for the people on this website. Inside joke, huh? [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 19:24, 13 March 2012 (CDT)
::::Thanks for all your input, what a short post from me a week ago can cause hahaha I like the 'Unidentified' logo and I have put it on top all movies where somebody else may be able to identify a gun I could not, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 13:19, 18 March 2012 (CDT)

== Infoboxes. ==

I am interested in trying to get the [[Template:Infobox Movie|Movie Infobox]] more widely used on the site. I think that ''if it is done well'' it could be very useful on the pages. One of the best features of wikipedia (IMHO) is the infoboxes which give you the basic information at a glace without needing to search the page. I would love some input from people, particularly the admins, regarding how best to make these infoboxes better. I want to make sure that the information they list is useful and valid, not just text filler and puff. Post your thoughts! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:51, 16 March 2012 (CDT)

== New idea to help identify guns ==

So a while ago I started the Manufacturer pages as a way to help identify guns. I had another idea that I wanted to try on for size with people. Recently, I was working on [[CSI: Miami - Season 9]] and came across a submachine gun that I didn't recognize. I immediately went to the [[:Category: Submachine Gun]] page but was forced to go through every link trying to find the one that I was looking for.

What do you guys think of adding a gallery of some sort to the Category pages that shows the BASIC models of the guns included? When I say basic I mean that we wouldn't need an image of the MAC-10, MAC-11 and Cobray M11/9. Seeing the basic MAC-10 would be enough to direct you to the MAC-10 page where you can figure out whether the gun you are looking at is in fact a MAC-10 or one of the other variants. Similarly, an image of any one of the MP5s would suffice, we wouldn't need images of each of the variants.

If I can get the okay from at least one admin, I would love to try this out on the [[:Category: Submachine Gun]] page and see what you all think. :-)
(Note that I also posted this in the forum).

--[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 18:19, 17 March 2012 (CDT)

:YOU MUST IMPLEMENT THIS ON ALL THE WEAPON CATEGORY PAGES. Sorry about the caps lock, this is just such an awesome idea, and it turned out so well on the submachine gun page. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 18:40, 18 March 2012 (CDT)

Talk:Main Page

2012-03-14T00:24:16Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* New category: "Containing Unidentified Firearm"? */

Talk:Battlefield 3

2012-03-14T00:17:32Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* 3 Expansions planned for BF3 */

See [[Talk:Battlefield 3/Archive 1]] for older discussions.

__TOC__

== Why am I not surprised? ==

Part of me isn't too surprised that the CODMW3 article would be taken off the Work in Progress Status in a much shorter time than BF3's page. Personally I think MW3 committed a war crime with how atrocious the M16A4 looks both in the first person and 3rd person models of it. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:00, 16 November 2011

:Just the M16? :/ Hell, the P99 is the only pistol where they didn't get something wrong. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:14, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:It has more to do with the fact that MW3 makes more mistakes and therefore is far more fun to write about. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:18, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::My personal favourite screw up in MW3 has to be the Skorpion's scope rail mount, with the "MG36" as a close runner up. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 03:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::I still mad about the fact they suddenly decided that it'll better that the M4A1 will have a 20-round magazine rather than a 30-round magazine -_- --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 03:05, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:::Lol good points all around. I'm not too knowledgeable on everything but I'm in the service and I use the M16A4 often. So it stuck out like a sore thumb the moment I picked up the rifle in the game that something was really freaking off about it. Like it wasn't already bad having 30 rounds come out of a 20 round mag. But bolt on rails to A2 Handguards? Really?! XDDD I don't know how accurate that P99 is, but it irks the hell out of me seeing it held one handed in the First Person Model. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:25 16 November 2011

Ya know? It's funny that the "fact" they are using military advisers to make the game better in "tactics" and stuff (yeah, right), this military advisers or what ever, aren't aware of the way the developers model the weapons and doesn't 100% reassemble to the real life one's :/ I guess the developers tell them "We don't really give a damn about realism, just tell us how the hell modern warfare works"... Still, the guys of BF3 made a bit better, though it does have also many things unrealistic, like the fact Marines are using M16A3's instead of M16A4's, and some of them running with an M240 like it a was wooden gun. Sigh. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 02:57, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:The thing about an advisor is that his job is to answer questions. It's up to the developers if they a) ask him the right questions and b) pay attention to his answers. I believe ''Star Trek's'' science advisors have publically complained that they're only asked for advice on what terminology to use and never on whether something is actually good science. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:15, 16 November 2011 (CST)

One thing SP Campaign of BF3 proves is that BF3 shouldn't have SP Campaign in the first place. One would expect it to be more authentic, yet it takes approach of CoD: "We just put randomly weapons we have in MP whether or not they fit in". So suddenly we have Marines with M16A3s and M240Bs (instead of M16A4s and M240Gs), insurgents (exactly insurgents and not organized militia from pre-alpha trailers) with AK-74Ms and AEK-971s (instead of AK-47s / AKMs), Spetsnaz member Vladimir with 5.56 A-91 (despite Russian forces simply not using this caliber even for SF), etc. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:27, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:Let's not forget that the protagonist of the game, Blackburn, during the interrogations scenes, you can see his name and branch tags that they're in white and straight rather than MARPAT and in an angle with the chest pockets. Also, one of the the guys in Blackburn's team, though I can't remember his exact name (the guy who carries M136 all the time), wears MultiCam OCP, still, rather than MARPAT uniform. Eventually, war games wouldn't be realistic as real life, even in the small parts. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 11:22, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Except my games (If I ever make games). :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 11:34, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Plus, they (Marines) get CAS from Little Birds. Apparently, to the game devs the terms 'US Army' and 'USMC' are interchangeable. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:50, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:I don't recall the insurgents using AEK-971s in the Iran missions, usually it was a random stew of your typical AKS-74u, AK-74M (don't real militants from the former Soviet bloc use the more modern 5.45 AK-74 at times?), RPKs, and the KH2002. However, the terrorists with Solomon from later on in the story do use all this, and even more somewhat outlandish equipment. Also, since the page is incomplete, can you explain to me how you identify the Marine's M16 models as the A3 versions? During the campaign I recall Blackburn's M16 as being able to fire in fully automatic. (Except that one mission where you inexplicably jump off with an HK416) Also, didn't Vladimir use the AS VAL throughout the Spetsnaz missions? And although it's not top-notch realistic Ala ''The Hurt Locker'', I wouldn't exactly outright call it the CoD approach. I mean, just look at what they did with Black Ops. Pointing out every inaccuracy in that game is to the point of turning it into a drinking game. Long Fallen 17:49, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Other than that one HK416 Blackburn had, which was odd, if they worst things the Marines had were M16A3s instead of A4s and M240Bs instead of M240Gs, then I'm happy enough. And the PLR only had 74Ms, 74Us, and RPKs if I remember correctly, the later enemies had AEKs. All the weird guns were given to Kaffarov's private army, as he is an arms dealer. It's like complaining you see a few M1928s instead of M1A1s in a WWII movie. Black Ops.. is Black Ops, and MW3 had FADs in the hands of African militia... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:20, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Maybe it is related to the "AKS-74U vs. UMP issue": in some of the videos of "Operation Swordbreaker", inside of the building, leading to anti-sniper position, one of the insurgents is certainly equipped with AEK-971, with others having AKS-74U and AK-74M (AK-74 would be correct for former Soviet bloc militant but not AK-74M unless he managed to scavenge it from Russian soldier). For M16A3, check one of the Marines on the way to bridge in the same mission. And while Kiril used the AS "Val", Vladimir used the 5.56 A-91. And yes, as Alex said, Black Ops... is Black Ops *sadface* --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:17, 17 November 2011 (CST)

:::You are right, that one insurgent always has an AEK, but that's an exception. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:31, 17 November 2011 (CST)

Cod always screws up the guns
:What does that have to do with Battlefield 3? [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:12, 22 January 2012 (CST)

== Sidearms ==

Has anyone else noticed Campo carries ''two'' sidearms, one on his chest and one by his hip? Looks like two Glocks.

[[Image:BF3-Glock-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Ten more and he'll be a Glockenspiel.]]

[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:18, 18 November 2011 (CST)

:I'm sorry, but that caption was just too good. On topic however, it seems as if the handgun holstered on his chest seems pretty low res to be made out. Could it be a designer oversight or something? - Long Fallen 17:21, 18 November 2011 (CST)

::Maybe they are copying Epps from [[Transformers: Dark of the Moon]], he nonsensically carries a pair of Glocks in the same way as well... --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 18 November 2011 (CST)

::Well, that's the Assault kit's chest, with the Glock and all, so they most likely gave him a leg holster and forgot about that one. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:01, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:::It's like in MW2 where the snipers carry unusable M1911. Although it is peculiar that the Marine in this game carries unusable Glock and not M9 or MEU(SOC). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:17, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== BTK Weapons ==

Finally! http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg

:MG36 and Jackhammer? Guess the XM8 and plasma rifle will be in the next DLC. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:30, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:I guess that confirms that there will be no PLA Faction DLC *sadface* I still hope for EU Faction :|
:Also confirmed that HK53 is back intact :)
:--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Why do they choose to include the "HK" prefix in the HK53, but not on the M416? [[User:Santos|Santos]] 11:26, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:::I'll ask Demize why this HK is okay (and the HK21 in BF2). Actually, they hinted they might do more weapon DLCs later, so I'm expecting a "Back To Bad Company" pack with all three XM8s and other stuff. Also, not a plasma rifle, but I've always thought it'd be cool to see Halo guns in another game, the human ones. For those of you that don't know, they all make functional sense. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:48, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::::lol yeah all those functional Spartan Lasers we have lying around. Though it would be cool to see an NTW-20 in a videogame. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:45, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:::::[http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle Have] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle1 you] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle2 said] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle3 NTW-20]? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:34, 12 December 2011 (CST)

== RPK ==

Incidentally, I need to check if the RPK-74 has a flash hider. If not, with wood furniture and a ribbed metal magazine, it's actually an RPK with a sight rail, not a -74 at all. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:10, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Maybe I didn't spend enough time using it, but I remember it having black furniture. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:44, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Checking my PS3 video captures it's very dark brown; more to the point, though, it's got that standard AK-style handguard with two holes through the middle (with a RIS foregrip sticking out the bottom, admittedly); the -M polymer handguard is a different shape and has ridges all along the top of the gas tube.

::[[Image:Soviet RPK-74.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK-74 light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]
::[[Image:rpk74m.jpg|thumb|none|601px|RPK-74M light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]
::[[File:BF3-RPK-1.jpg|thumb|none|601px|]]

::If it doesn't have a flash hider, I think that makes it an RPK. I thought I could see one there, but in my PS3 video it looks like it doesn't have one and the in-world and pickup models don't have one either. I was going to say "except the scope mount" but MPM's RPK image has one:

::[[Image:RPK lmg.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK Light Machine Gun with 40 round magazine - 7.62x39mm]]

::Is this normal? From what I'd read the scope bracket was an -M thing. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:35, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::Thanks for clearing up the RPK differences, as for the scope rail, scopes are nice to have sometimes, I'm sure some of the older RPKs were fitted with scope mounts as aftermarket parts in real life. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:06, 20 November 2011 (CST)
::::As the RPK in the game only has the bracket fitted when a sight is there, I would certainly put it in the "aftermarket" category. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:37, 20 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Oh right, just like the AKS-74U becomes an AKS-74UN when mounted with optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:47, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Just to assure you this ''does'' happen (it's so nice having a PS3 video of half the game to pull shots from):

:[[Image:BF3-RPKForegrip.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

:RPK with inexplicable foregrip. I'd just forgotten they don't all have that. Also, is it just me or is the scope mounting screwed to the side of the dust cover rather than attached to a bracket? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)

== Single Action Army ==

Just letting you guys know, as stated on its page it is called Single Action Army on this site as there are so many nearly identical replicas calling it the more correct Colt 1873 might actually be wrong, and SAA is used as a catch-all term. However, just as we assume a full-size Glock is a 17 unless we can tell otherwise, we also assume a gun in a game is not a clone, unless we can tell otherwise. Therefore, it is assumed that the drawing of the SAA is the original Colt 1873, and should be named as such. This is just to avoid an edit war, or something. :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== M224 ==

I don't know about Xbox, but on the PS3 the M224 definitely has an M7 baseplate in multiplayer. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 15:54, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Yup, it has one on 360. Lol at the baseplate having a designation :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:19, 19 November 2011 (CST)
:::Just about everything in the military has a designation. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:10, 10 March 2012 (CST)

::Feel free to change it, I was going off it not having one in single. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:31, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== Kaffarov's Private Army ==

While I understand that Kaffarov is an arms dealer, it boggles my mind how so many times in fiction there are people who are able to procure such military spec equipment like the F2000, Mk.17 (SCAR-H), AEK-971, and so many others. Surely the companies and or countries that produce them don't freely sell them to whatever buyers there are? My question is how would people like Kaffarov even be able to avoid the system and acquire such equipment? I don't know if it has been answered elsewhere, or for obvious reasons '''hasn't''', but it's just something that I haven't been able to explain logically. -- Long Fallen 18:03, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Reminds me of [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Legionnaire Legionnaire] from [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Battlefield:_Bad_Company Battlefield: Bad Company]. And that guy paid his mercenaries in ''gold bars'', mind you. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Kaffarov... Makarov... Kaffarov... Makarov... Is it only me or does BF3 is trying to copy MW3 in many matters? :/ --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 23:29, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Um, what's so suspicious about Russian (or Russified) surname ending in -ev or -ov? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::I'm not sure either, but it lets us have the cool guns people don't really use, so it gets a pass in my books. Also, those two names aren't really that similar, and the characters are nothing alike. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:12, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:To answer the question, no. Any customer who could afford top-drawer equipment would be dealing directly with the company that made it, the kinds of people who go to dodgy arms dealers want weapons that are simple enough to equip illiterate militiamen with, cheap enough to equip a ''lot'' of them with, and have widely available spare parts and ammunition. It's no longer the era when unpaid former Soviet commanders would empty entire arms depots onto the black market and flee to countries that don't have extradition treaties with Russia, and no longer the era when you could get a superpower to pony up a whole bunch of equipment and training just by saying you were fighting for / against communism. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:46, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::I see, but I recall this story from a few years back -[http://www.expatica.com/be/news/local_news/factory-tightens-security-after-gun-thefts-23226.html Stolen Five-seveNs from FNH factories] (I had no idea the P90 was a handgun xD) - And then there's this too -[http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20081112_worrying_signs_border_raids Mexican drug cartels being armed with P90s and Five-seveNs] So I still want to know, what are the likely chances of seeing terrorists with such equipment? I mean, these articles seem to bring it to light. (Sorry if I'm going off topic) -- Long Fallen 00:42, 21 November 2011 (CST)

:::With Mexico it's a situation where a lot of the top-class armament is purchased in the United States and smuggled across the border; similar arrangements were used to smuggle arms to the IRA during The Troubles in Northern Ireland. That's the "buying directly from the supplier" kind of deal, and is usually done without a dealer acting as an intermediary (because the Cartels have enough money to do it themselves, or take the weapons in part payment for supplying product to drug dealers). Your typical Eastern Bloc / African arms dealer just buys up weapons somewhere a war is ending and ships them to where a war is still going on, because the buyers don't have the contacts, legitimacy or resources to do it by themselves. A lot of the guns these guys circulate have been involved in local conflicts for years or even decades.

:::Top-end hardware typically comes from governments and organisations. Insurgents in Iraq didn't get top-of-the-line anti-tank weapons and training in making IEDs from some guy in the business of moving weapons, they got them from sympathisers in places like Iran. Alarmism about what ''kind'' of weapons terrorists have is pretty foolish anyway, since generally they prefer the instant, indiscriminate destruction of explosives to trying to shoot people with a gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::::Ah, I see, thanks for enlightening me :) -- Long Fallen 20:25, 21 November 2011 (CST)

Whoever said "a lot of the top-class armament...blah blah Mexico... smuggled from US..." is rather wrong. The Mexican cartels who have P90s and M16s and etc western weaponry are getting it from the Mexican military and police, only a small percentage of the guns near the US border are actually smuggled in to Mexico from the US. The numbers seem higher because recently Mexico has been sending in stores of arms they have confiscated over the past X amount of years (that they know can be most likely traced to the US) to get traced at the same time. This leads to a overblown number that looks good on anti-firearms pamphlets. If you think about it a bit, what do you think would be easier and cheaper:

1. Finding and paying someone to buy 10 semi-automatic guns in the US at ridiculous prices, risking him getting caught, losing your money, going through all the background checks, etc, then sneaking them over the border. Not to mention finding ammo.

Or

2a. Paying some guerrillas in some SA country x amount of dope to bring in a ship, container, truck, or plane full of 100s or 1000s of eastern bloc or former US military weaponry, that is most likely going to be fully automatic. Plus large quantities of ammo for said weaponry.

2b. Stealing or buying from a corrupt military/ police official brand new weaponry.

The "X% of guns in Mexico are from the US" myth is a fallacy created by the Mexican and US govts and heavily compounded by the ATF smuggling them themselves or letting them walk, and the FBI for not laying out the specifics of the stats. Then the subsequent (ratings improving) media hype compounds it further.

Not saying it doesn't happen, just that it is greatly exaggerated.

Now as for how someone like Kaffarov would get the weaponry, its pretty simple. 1. Start a (possibly dummy) corporation (possibly in a different country). 2. Buy from a manufacturer saying they are intended for "security", or "testing", or hell, even arming your own "PMC". 3.Lock and load. How do you think PMCs such as Xe (Blackwater), AirScan, Aegis DS, etc.. get their new "HSLD" weaponry? Most international arms trafficking treaties do not extend to selling firearms to private entities in the same way they do governments.
Respectfully, the (somewhat intoxicated)-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 02:33, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:I wasn't saying it's the majority source, just the source of the more pricey / modern equipment. These people have supply networks that move ''tons'' of drugs across the border, they're not going to consider moving guns in the other direction a substantial risk; one would imagine their US buyers are probably the same people who buy their drugs, considering they're already going to be smuggling stuff back as payment and keeping their activities secret. Most of the weapons they get from the US aren't purchased legally (the big myth is they're bought legitimately from normal gun stores, SO WE MUST CLAMP DOWN ON THIS). Most of their stuff is indeed bought in from other sources, but weapons like the Barretts aren't going to be coming from just anywhere, and there ''is'' precedent from this happening in Northern Ireland where the IRA got a lot of their best weapons from Irish expatriates in America.

:As for Kaffarov, the main problem with the mythical top-end arms dealer is who he's supposed to sell these rare weapons on to, not how he'd get them himself. Sure, if it's ''just'' equipment for his private troops he might splash out, but he wouldn't be wholesaling in exotic arms with rare ammo and parts because nobody would buy them, plus he'd have problems with the companies he's buying from wondering why their weapons are suddenly turning up in conflict zones in the exact quantity they're selling them to his shell company. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::I know who! He's obviously selling to the Russian Army, Brazilian and African militants, and Makarov's terrorists in MW2 and MW3! [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:32, 23 November 2011 (CST)

: From what I remember in the BF3 novel Kaffarov was a former GRU agent handling weapons and training with then political ally Iran, who got too deep in the local agendas and was probably compromised. IN the novel his weapons were less new (Uzis and shit), but I could totally buy that Kaffarov was still connected enough to Russia's arms trade that he could probably weasel crates of AEK971s out of them without too much trouble. Supposedly that's how Solomon got the suitcase nukes in the first place anyway, off Kaffarov. (as a note the book's plot is little more coherent than the game, probably worth the pickup if you're trying to dissect the game's narrative.)--[[User:Toadie|Toadie]] 04:17, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:This entire discussion is clearly a case of thinking way harder about what Kaffarov is hypothetically capable of procuring for his men than DICE did while they were working on the game. As for the whole "Mexico Gun Smuggling Debate" - try reading some academic reports on the subject before claiming that the statistics were cooked up ([http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Chapter%206-%20U.S.%20Firearms%20Trafficking%20to%20Mexico,%20New%20Data%20and%20Insights%20Illuminate%20Key%20Trends%20and%20Challenges.pdf Wilson Centre: U.S Firearms Trafficking to Mexico] is a long read, but it does illuminate the various ways guns are smuggled and how they are interdicted) --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 16:41, 23 November 2011 (CST)

well look at the Libyan civil war were both sides were able to get massive amounts of G-36s --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 20:38, 23 November 2011 (CST)

Most of the weapons such as Barretts, M16s, etc.. are coming from the Mexican military. As for the IRA in the 80s I know all about that, that was a different time. Many things happened back then that could not happen now. Plus the IRA stopped getting guns from the US when they realized it was easier to get them from places like Palestine and etc..
With Libya... well HK is in deep right now for selling to some state police in Mexico that they shouldn't be selling to, it wouldn't surprise me if they sold to Libya and other places.
And Markit, the report you linked to actually states in a couple places that the reports are skewed by many factors.
This can state the facts better than I can: http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/90PercentMyth.pdf
-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 00:57, 24 November 2011 (CST)
:There was also an incident during the Georgia-Russia war where Georgian SF were seen with G36s that they previously weren't known to have. HK weapons are turning up in all kinds of strange places. :S [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:28, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:@Ranger01 - There's no verifiable proof that all those high-end weapons are coming solely from Mexican law enforcement - last time I checked, they could get better weapons than the FN PS90s, Romanian WASR clones, MAK-90s, AR-15 clones with the post-ban features, SKS rifles with Tapco furniture etc. that have been turning up in seizures of cartel arsenals. I know that the 90% statistic was erroneous, but I also do not believe that the percentage is only 12% according to your report (extrapolating only from serial numbers is faulty in itself when criminals usually take measures to remove/modify them). Besides, the "most deadliest weapons come from Central America" does not equal "most of the weapons come from Central America", which seems to be the tack that your article is taking. Also erroneous is the claim that Mexican military personnel are defecting and taking "American-made" weapons with them - the "150,000" figure was for desertions (which take place for any number of reasons in a conscription-based system) and most soldiers are armed with Mexican-produced versions of H&K weapons.

::On an additional note, the G36s that were seen in Libya were likely a gray market sale - a firm buys the weapons with the end user certificate for one country, ships them there, then transfers them to the actual destination. A more controversial story would be that FN directly sold several hundred FN 2000s, FN 303s and P90s to Libya in 2009-2010. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 18:32, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::Politics aside, F2000s would be ''great'' for a desert country; they're almost airtight. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:22, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::Well Saudi Arabia did adopt the F2000 as their standard rifle. -- Long Fallen 21:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Hmm, didn't know that. As probably most of us are, I haven't had hands on on most of these, but am well read on them, and the F2000 would be one of my first choices of assault rifle if I had a country/army :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:51, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::::Now it's just a matter or wondering if they'll ever get around to using them... Sad is the day when hundreds of beautiful F2000s sit untouched in Arabian armories, gathering up dust. It's enough to bring a tear to any IMFDB user's eye xD -- Long Fallen 02:43, 27 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::Researchers point to '''Heckler & Koch G3A3''' being replaced with '''Steyr AUG''' in Saudi Arabian Army[http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_standard_infantry_rifle_for_saudi_arabian_army][http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110305182603AA3EBn4] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:13, 27 November 2011 (CST)

::::::::So the SA National Guard bought the 55,000 F2000s... but the AUG was on issue? Did it replace the AUG? The standard rifle is the G3A3 as of now? A lot of this information feels so outdated. -- Long Fallen 16:19, 27 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::::Saudi Arabian National Guard is separate from Saudi Arabian Army. An analogy would be 'Waffen-SS' (SANG) and 'Wehrmacht' (SAA)[http://www.dnipogo.org/fcs/comments/c424.htm] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:08, 28 November 2011 (CST)

== Blackburn from BHD ?? ==

Go see the Colt M4 section and the M4 series below it is said that Black burn holds M4 quite often. I would like to ask is this Blackburn any how related to Todd Blackburn from Black Hawk Down, the Ranger who fell from the Black Hawk chopper? - [[S9771773G]] 09:47, 20 November 2011 (GMT)

:I imagine it's just a coincidence, Blackburn is a "heroic" surname like Carver or Slater or whatever. I'd have thought if they were referencing Black Hawk Down they'd have named him after someone like Shughart or Gordon, really. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Doubt it. 'Battlefield 3' is unrelated to 'Black Hawk Down', plus, Todd Blackburn is Army Ranger while Henry Blackburn is Marine Recon. Proper analogy would be Patterson's from 'Medal of Honor' series. Both are in Army and [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/Jim_Patterson one] is actually the grandson of [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/James_Steven_Patterson another]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:19, 20 November 2011 (CST)
:'''P.S.''' Although, this would explain the appearance of Little Birds...

::There's also the fact that Todd Blackburn is a real person while Henry Blackburn is a fictional one. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:14, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::True, there is even a page on [http://www.aweekendofheroes.com/vips/todd-blackburn.php Todd Blackburn]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:27, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::::From the link posted by Masterius: "In reality, it is not known why Blackburn lost his grip on the rope and is generally assumed that his inexperience led to his fall ('''However, Master Sergeant Matt Eversmann states that around the time when Blackburn fell, the UH60 canted slightly, and had to put his hand down to stay upright'''. The ranger that roped in after Blackburn also swears that he had grabbed the rope.) Additionally, the film incorrectly portrays Blackburn as a new arrival to Somalia, when in reality he had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company."
::::Um... why would Matt Eversmann have any trouble staying upright in said canting helicopter ''when he was in a Humvee on the ground''? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::[http://inquirer.philly.com/packages/somalia/nov16/default16.asp Because he was, in fact, in a Blackhawk?] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 15:00, 25 November 2011 (CST)
:::::'''P.S.''' ^ Oh, the age there is said to be 18, and "just months out of a Florida high school", instead of 20, and "had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company". So which of the descriptions is the correct one?

::::::They'd said on the DVD commentary as well as in the History Channel documentary about the raid that Eversmann was with the convoy the whole time. Guess they didn't have their facts straight. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::He was the leader of Chalk Four as shown in the film and was inserted by Black Hawk, callsign Super 67. He didn't go to the crash site as shown in the film though, instead he was part of "The Lost Convoy" carrying the captured prisoners, think that is what you are thinking of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:36, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::An interesting thing I found about Todd Blackburn was that he was born on October 25, the same date that BF3 was released, maybe that date was selected on purpose by DICE? [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 19:34, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Now this is intriguing... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:01, 3 December 2011 (CST)

I can tell you without any doubts that BF3 has several [[Generation Kill]] references. For example:

- The main protagonist is part of the 1st Reconnaissance Battalion.

- When driving towards Tehran in the humvees and complaining that they signed up for an ambush, the driver says "Frankly gentleman, I'm not hearing the aggression I'd like. Keep scanning". Which is a reference to the 5th episode "A Burning Dog" when the team leaders are preparing to clear out an ambush by a bridge.

- When Henry Blackburn and Co. drives in a convoy to capture Kaffarov the arms dealers. Matkovic, the guy wearing MultiCam OCP and the AT4, was sleeping on the convoy and when woken up he says "thirty four minutes... I've been asleep for thirty four minutes drinking a vanilla milkshake." Also a reference from the 5th episode A Burning Dog, when Ray Person wakes Brad Colbert to a team leader meeting, Brad responds "fifty six minutes. I've been asleep for fifty six minutes".

[[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:00, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Not to mention the character named Chaffin. There's more, I'll have to play it again to find them all.-protoAuthor 23:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)

== M203 Dog tag ==

I was watching my new unlocked dog tags on Battlelog, and saw that the 40mm GL proficiency Dog tag has an M203 in the background.
Should it be added to the list of weapons appearing in the game?

http://battlelog-cdn.battlefield.com/public/profile/bf3/stats/dogtags/lb/dtb094.png?v=1628729

[[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Yes it should, like the SAA. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:29, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Yeah, though I would prefer these as full screenshots if possible (ie someone unlocking / viewing them), I never like pages full of different aspect ratios and weird tiny images. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Well since we're mentioning weapons appearing on dog tags but not the actual game for usage, the USAS-12 proficiency dog tag has a SPAS-12 silhouette for some reason. It was probably directly ported from Bad Company 2 given how it looks. -- Long Fallen 17:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::Quite a number are, the SCAR-H is a SCAR-L. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::It actually peeves me that many of the assault rifle proficiency dog tags use the icons for the Bad Company 2 models, like most of the assault rifles equipped with grenade launchers. Especially the F2000 one, which isn't even possible to have an underslung grenade launcher, let alone the EGLM pictured on it. :P -- Long Fallen 21:05, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:::You'd be wrong about the F2000 not being able to take a grenade launcher.

:::[[Image:Fn f2000 3.jpg‎|thumb|none|500px|FN F2000 - 5.56x45mm NATO with [[FN EGLM|FN GL1]] - 40mm]]

:::[[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:38, 24 November 2011 (CST)

::::Ah, sorry, I should've made it clear that while the dog tag shows off the EGLM, you can't mount any kind of grenade launcher to the F2000 itself to use. -- Long Fallen 00:42, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::You mean ''in the game''. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:05, 26 November 2011 (CST)

== Going Rambo ==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMcM7OpC2dI&hd=1

Just how realistic is it? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:02, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:I think they should implement an overheating system for all the light machineguns. Just like in Battlefield 2. [[User:Santos|Santos]] 06:33, 30 November 2011 (CST)

::Barrel changes would be more interesting, I think. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:32, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:::And then there will be people complaining that Battlefield is becoming simulator. Rather odd, since magazine system and overheating system were part of the core Battlefield games since the beginning... Sigh, Bad Company... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:52, 1 December 2011 (CST)

== Back to Karkand ==

There's an expansion pack coming out in December, and it's going to have ten new guns and four new vehicles.

Here's a list of the weapons that I can absolutely confirm from seeing in the kill-feed in the trailers:

MG36 with a top rail instead of the carrying handle/optics

L85A2

QBZ-95B

QBU-88

FAMAS (Looks to be the Felin version)

There also looks to be some sort of Kalashnikov style weapon, but it's not shown clearly enough for me to recognize.

Here are the trailers if you feel like playing Where's Waldo:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=TyN_Zjw4l-s Overall Trailer]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjTmieRMKjo Karkand Trailer]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emGXp-qRrVg Oman Trailer]

Also of note, I have the PC version and just about all the weapons unlocked. I might upload screenshots if I get the chance.
--[[User:AchingScaphoid|AchingScaphoid]] 08:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:Unless they've got the screenshot feature working now, you'll need FRAPS to get screenshots. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:20, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:There are 2 AK variants in the first trailer you posted, I think the first is an [[AKM]], second is the same [[AKS-74U]] with the incorrect milled receiver as seen in the main game. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:37, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:The L85 is in the first trailer, although very briefly. 0.37, there's an L85. Old plastic handguard, RIS instead of the 19mm rail. No idea on the optic, other than it not being a SUSAT. --[[User:Spanner|Spanner]]

::I think it might be an Elcan of some sort but not sure. The newest modification to the L85A2 replaces the old rail with a MIL-STD-1913 rail and is fitted with an Elcan Spectre with a piggybacked CCO. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:08, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:::I've also seen real L85s with ACOGs, so using that could be authentic for optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:13, 29 November 2011 (CST)

::::An ACOG on a MIL-STD-1913 would be incorrect though. British ACOGs have a proprietary mount for the original 19mm rail. Any gun that is fitted with the new rail will be using the ELCAN. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Indeed:
:::::[http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/files/BEMIL069/upload/2008/02/2_acog.jpg L85A2 with ACOG on mount]
:::::[http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee252/TarnishUK/SpecterOS4x.jpg L85A2 with Specter on rail]
:::::--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:41, 1 December 2011 (CST)

I added them to the page, feel free to expand them. This picture was on the Blog a few weeks back, it shows all 10 weapons:

http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg

[[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:List of all weapons and attachments in BtK expansion:

:http://mp1st.com/2011/11/30/the-complete-list-of-bf3-back-to-karkand-weapons-and-attachments-revealed/

:--[[User:Wikinerd|Wikinerd]] 09:04, 30 November 2011 (CST)

::Really, the best they could manage was photos of someone's TV? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:I'm not too sure what to think of the Pancor Jackhammer being in this game, I mean, we've already got the USAS-12 as the automatic shotgun, if they wanted to add in another one, they could've just added in the AA-12. Anyone kinda with me on this? - Long Fallen 14:20, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::Not a fan of automatic shotguns anyway, since they, technically, overshadow the semi-automatic ones (because of selective fire). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)

:::The USAS-12 has competition with the Jackhammer, I haven't unlocked it yet but I remember picking up a kit with the Jackhammer and it was like using a slightly lower capacity DAO-12 with it's 6+1 rounds but with automatic fire rate. This video shows some gameplay, extended mags give it 13+1 magazine capacity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q95ICdl9fsE&feature=related It's apparently "slower than the USAS" from what little experience I've had with it and from people I've asked about it [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)

== MG36 ==
I know that there were only 100 or so MG36s made, but isn't a standard G36 with a bipod foregrip and a double drum mag exactly the same thing? I get that if there's one in a movie it will actually be a G36 with bipod and drum added, but in a game can't it be called an MG36 since it didn't start as something else? Also, it IS an MG, not an AR, unless the RPK, M27, and QBB-95 are ARs too. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:An MG36 has a bipod handguard, C-mag, ''and'' a heavy barrel and reinforced action. This, like basically every other MG36 that has appeared in anything, is based on a standard G36 with a bipod and drum, as the Bundrswehr use. I don't think there's even a specific name for the configuration, but it is ''not'' called MG36. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)
::Oh okay, but would the heavy barrel look any different externally? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:11, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:::I believe it's mostly internal. However, IIRC the MG36 was rejected the same year the MIL-STD-1913 standard was drawn up, so an "MG36" with a flat-top rail would have to be a G36 or an after the fact modification of an MG36, and speculating a gun that isn't real ''must'' be modified is trying a little too hard to cover up a simple naming error. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 20:15, 30 November 2011 (CST)
::::Oh okay, well, if it had the standard carry handle I'd say it should be "MG36", but seeing as it has the "C" one, it's a G36 with a bipod, C-Mag, and G36C rail. To be fair though, MG36 is a ''lot'' easier for the sake of the game. On DICE's part I mean. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:10, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Alex - According to G3Kurz on HKpro, the barrel OD is 30% thicker. http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk-long-gun-talk/94949-wtk-mg36-barrel-question.html Evil Tim - Where did you hear that it had reinforced action? --[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 22:44, 30 November 2011 (CST)

== "Kaffarov" ==

So, is this mission always buggy as hell, or did I just have a bad run screencapping it? As well as that weirdness with the Barrett I had guns inheriting the texture of the floor they were on top of (I have a lovely image of a linoleum QJY-88), some pictures of MP7s with their magazine against their front grip and their stock hovering in front of them at ninety degrees to the gun and every single USAS-12 in the level appearing on the ground with no magazine. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:That always seems to happen with USASs and MP7s, but please, please add the linoleum QJY-88 to the main page, just for laughs :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)

::Also, I really didn't get the last level. Why would you hijack a train that was already going to where you want to go (thus drawing attention to yourself for no good reason), then randomly rig it to explode even though you've already got a nuke on board? And why was one man with a detonator standing in the same room as the explosives that detonator set off? And how did Blackburn know that trigger would set off the random bombs and not the nuke? I have questions, dammit. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:54, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:::You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:::This is my explanation and I know there's several holes in it but bear with me, it makes slightly more sense than just a lack of general explanation. The hijacking of the train was probably a distraction whereby once they got off their intended stop with the nuke, they would send it hurtling somewhere else for the police and other emergency services to follow. This would have then given them an opportunity to get the nuke to Times Square undetected while the emergency services scrambled to stop the train wired with explosives. In terms of the detonator, the guy was probably the patsy to serve as a suicide bomber-type to ensure the distraction seemed like the real deal and to lay blame once again on the PLR rather than Solomon. Blackburn knew that the trigger wouldn't set off the nuke because nukes require specialised arming devices if I'm not mistaken and you can't use a normal detonator to blow it up. Just my explanation of the events. Feel free to lay waste to my over-active imagination that came up with this somewhat cockamamie fill-in to explain the plotholes in the last mission. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:25, 7 December 2011 (CST)
::::The thing is the train was already ''going'' to Times Square, and detonating a nuke underground would create a sinkhole a large chunk of lower Manhattan would fall into; if anything it would be even worse than detonating it on the surface. Solomon could have just sat there alone with the thing in his lap on a timer or dead man's switch, the only purpose the hijacking ultimately served was to draw attention to the fact that something was up.

::::Then again, this story also had my very favourite, the framing device of the protagonist describing the action. I always smile when I imagine how it's going during the actual level. "So then I ducked into cover. Looked up but didn't shoot. Reloaded. Aimed down my sights. Saw a guy ducking out so I fire twice and reloaded and then..." "Weren't we supposed to be on a time limit?" "One Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Seventh Amendment." "Ah, yes, the right to defence in the form of an average-length modern video game." [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:47, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Correct, the train was going to Times Square but perhaps it was not the last station? I'm not sure how the trains work in New York because I don't personally live there but it's possible that Times Square was a station on a longer line of stations where Solomon could have sent the police, ESU, FBI, Homeland Security and whatever government agencies to follow the train rigged with explosives. Creating a sinkhole does seem like a better idea but I think the purpose of blowing it in Times Square itself above ground was to send a message. The mushroom cloud that would be better seen from above ground would strike more fear, in my opinion but hey, that's just my two cents.

:::::In terms of the framing device, I have to agree with the utter ridiculousness of the idea of Blackburn describing the action he performed when recalling every single detail from the playable level but it's far more plausible than Black Ops. Thinking of how Mason could describe every single detail of his action movie experience as well as the experience of the SR-71 Blackbird pilot just made my brain stop completely. Especially when he was extremely doped up and possibly tortured judging by the bloodstains on various parts of his clothing. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:59, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::::::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca4D0-s8OsI&feature=related Believe me, an underground nuclear detonation is hard to mistake for anything else]. As for Blops, I always had the image of the guys questioning him picking up the bottle of truth serum and checking the expiry date when he started with the G11s and WA2000s. Or the whole THE NUMBERS thing just ending up with him forgetting his wife's birthday. "No! Reznov said it was tommorrow!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:11, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::Holy wow. I know that's destructive and it's horrible to say this but that is indeed impressive. My sentiments exactly. However, they probably just went meh because they (as in the interrogators who were CIA) were probably using LSD as a truth serum as well as a mind control drug at the time. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 05:46, 7 December 2011 (CST)

== Question ==

I just got this game (yay! I absolutely love it, even the singleplayer) and I was gonna get screenshots but I heard I need FRAPS. What is FRAPS and how do I get it? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:34, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:It is a program that can record gameplays and you can also take screenshots with a hotkey if it is running in the background. It has a freeware version. I think in the free version it can only save images in BMP, but u can convert them easily. Get if from here: www.fraps.com. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 00:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)

::The free version watermarks videos, not sure if it does the same with screenshots. You're best off saving in BMP since the JPEG captures are pretty abysmal quality with lots of artifacting. Give me a few days first, though, I have fifteen hundred images of the singleplayer I need to sort through. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:29, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:::I just need screenshots and I have Photoshop CS4. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)

::::Then yeah, http://www.fraps.com/ to download the free version. Wikipedia says it doesn't watermark screenshots even on the free version, just be sure you have plenty of HD space since a 1920x1080 BMP weighs 3-6 megabytes. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:05, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::596 GB. :B - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:49, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::: I currently use FRAPS myself. It does not watermark screenshots. Haven't tried getting videos yet. Anyways, the race is on to see who can put up pictures first.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 14:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)

I will be uploading a lot of great screenshots for the page tomorrow, should I add pics of the iron sights or just ones of interest? (ie, misaligned sights, the M9's correct sights, the MEU's tritium sights, etc.) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:45, 8 December 2011 (CST)

:Actually, I'm in favour of having ironsight pictures on all video game pages, since they're so often missaligned, or out of scale, as a lot of what we do here is point out flaws and educate (hopefully) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:06, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::Yay, more work. I need more weight to this. :| - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 02:22, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::Iron sights are fine as long as they're reasonably interesting and the article doesn't have too many weapons; this one should be ok. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:30, 8 December 2011 (CST)

== My God ==

I am so glad with battlefield 3 and mainly dice the are actually listening to the community and something even better they are fixing incorrect guns.

Ex:

Tweaked the AN94 so its burst fire better conveys the real world advantage offered by this weapon.

Added Single Shot to the AN94 as an available fire mode.

Slightly increased the recoil on the M416 and removed the Burst Fire mode (this weapon incorrectly had burst fire, which was not authentic).

from latest patch --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 19:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:Cool! =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:Oh! But HK416 is still called M416? :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:13, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::Wait, really? they removed burst from the 416 and added semi to the 94? Wow, cool! Those were the only fire mode errors too :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:02, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::Well, aside from not being able to fire the spotting rifle on the SMAW. I still think it would be amusing to be able to shoot people with your 9mm tracer that shoots like a rocket. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::What? Oh, looked it up: "Each round consists of a special 9mm tracer bullet, crimped into a 7.62x51mm NATO casing with a .22 Hornet blank cartridge for propellant". That is the most WTF round I've ever heard of :O [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 13:41, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Alex, I don't suppose you could share the link with anyone reading this page? :) -- Long Fallen 14:17, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::::Oh right :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder-launched_Multipurpose_Assault_Weapon [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:58, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::I found a more detailed look at the round here: http://cartridgecollectors.org/cmo/cmo05oct.htm [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 16:49, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::::::I wonder if they're going to fix the "SVD" as well [[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:01, 4 December 2011 (CST)

:Is that just for PC? 'Cause I'm on the PS3 and the HK416 still has a burst mode and the AN-94 still doesn't have semi-auto as a fire mode. Or is this for the campaign? I haven't played the campaign again in a while. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:28, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::With the new patch that came out for the upcoming DLC, Back to Karkand. The AN-94 got the single-shot fire-mode and the HK416 got the burst-fire mode removed. Confirmed on the PC [[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::On the PS3 here, AN-94 still has the automatic/burst selection as before; no semiautomatic fire. The HK416 also still has semi/burst/fire selection. - Long Fallen 23:18, 9 December 2011 (CST)

:::Xbox still has the old AN 94 and M416 fire modes. Also if you use the AN 94 with iron sights and swap back and forth between your pistol, the front sight disappears on the Xbox. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:30, 20 December 2011 (CST)

::::That change is in the next patch we're supposed to get, it takes longer for consoles. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:54, 20 December 2011 (CST)

Any idea of when that is? I just started using the AN 94 and love the two round burst but I'm hindered at long range because of the recoil and rate of fire.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:05, 26 December 2011 (CST)

:No idea, it has to go through certification from MS/Sony and usually takes 2-3 weeks. Ish. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:51, 26 December 2011 (CST)

== Changing Descriptions in screenshots. ==

If you take the screenshot, go ahead and put whatever you want in there. But if you're going to edit my words, do so only if there is a typo, misspell, incorrect information or bad grammar. Seriously, if you want to put your own words so badly, put your own damn screenshots up.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 00:58, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:Your screenshot descriptions read like a filing cabinet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:40, 5 December 2011 (CST)
Then like I said previously, put up your own damn screenshots--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 13:20, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:This is a wiki. The point of a wiki is collaborative editing. As stated in the [[Rules,_Standards_and_Principles#IMFDB_is_an_information_resource.2C_not_our_private_playground | Rules, Standards and Principles]], ''"IMFDB is an information resource, not our private playground."'' --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 13:48, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:And besides, if you take a look at the bottom of the edit window, you'll see it reads: '''If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.''' So... yeah. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:If you're going to get this precious about your screenshots, then don't bother uploading them at all. While IMFDB does have a certain unwritten concept of "uploader's privilege" it does not extend to captions that sound like they were sent in Morse code and don't match the way the other captions already on the page are written and formatted. Also, lose the attitude or you'll be getting some time out. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:50, 5 December 2011 (CST)
::Unless the map or game mode is important to the image, which it usually is not, it should be left out. As for the rest of your captions, I have no problem with what you put, just the map/gamemode doesn't belong here. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:38, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:Fine fine. I didn't know you were an admin so don't ban me just to prove you can. Sorry if I sounded a little terse, but it is annoying having your words re-written constantly. But just one last thing, cause I noticed you mass changed my changes back to what you had, would you mind changing "the player character" to the class? Such as "The US/Russian Engineer in Multiplayer holds the A-91"? (i'll put that screenshot up in a bit)--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:10, 5 December 2011 (CST)
::I mainly do that because the character has no name in multi, it's much easier in single where you can do "Blackburn holds an X." "An engineer holds an X" seems a little awkward in terms of sentence structure; it feels oddly unspecific about the character holding the weapon being the one the player is controlling. I mainly make a deal of saying "the player character holds..." because it annoys me when people say "the player holds..." since the player is either holding a control pad or a mouse. Typically if the player is holding a gun something has gone very badly wrong somewhere along the line. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:28, 6 December 2011 (CST)

::[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] is admin since October 2011, so keep that in mind. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:07, 6 December 2011 (CST)

:::I didn't know that, congrats! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:17, 6 December 2011 (CST)

::I just think that it sounds better than just saying "the player character" because it is just extremely generic. That's why I usually just put "weapon with extra extra extra attatched" without putting player character, cause it's obvious there is a player character holding the weapon. And you don't want people to be holding guns in real life? Tsk Tsk. What kinda firearm wiki admin are you? And relating to that, is there a list of site Admins available? Is it in the forum? Cause I know there's at least 5 of you guys floating around here (plus Bunni, but I have never actually seen him post or discuss something in the main wiki) and it'd be nice to know who they are. --[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 10:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::[[Imfdb :. guns in movies :. movie guns :. the internet movie firearms database:Administrators|There you go]]. Overly long page title BTW. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:29, 7 December 2011 (CST)

As long as you don't edit my post about the PP2000 doing as much damage and throwing pebbles at someones face, that's my gem right there. :p (not like there's anything I can do about if it does get edited) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 13:24, 10 December 2011 (CST)

:I won't change it. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 10 December 2011 (CST)

== Knife used by Dmitri ==

Does anyone know what kind of knife was used by Dmitri in the mission "Comrades"? Its the one he uses to cut the wires in the garage to unlock the gates. It looks ... funky and not very utilitarian--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:06, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:It's a Spetsnaz machete. [http://www.sovietarmystuff.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1160] --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 21:25, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:A more in-depth look here: http://interestingswords.com/machete/russian-machete-taiga.html [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 17:10, 8 December 2011 (CST)

== Furthering the US Army / USMC mix theory ==

IRL USMC use neither [[M26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System|M26 MASS]] nor [[Heckler & Koch M320|M320 GLM]]. Army does. USMC still use [[M203 grenade launcher|M203 GL]] as UGL. As for hand-held grenade launcher... [[Milkor MGL#MGL 140|M32 MGL]]. Spammy for MP but would have worked for SP (like [[Barrett M82#Barrett M107|M107 LRSR]] did). Thoughts shared. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:40, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:Well yeah, and they also don't use the M1A2 Abrams. This seems to be in some nebulous future where the USMC has upgraded all their equipment. Also the M107 was actually pretty stupid since all you did with it was shoot some guys on the other side of a courtyard with a non-magnifying scope. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:44, 9 December 2011 (CST)

::Gotta say, upgrading equipment in the future one 'A' more doesn't seem as excessive as with entirely new one... But yeah, it's still upgrade. Like, say, giving the future US Army the USMC [[Beretta 92 pistol series#Beretta M9A1|M9A1]].
::Heh, that's the wrong mission they put M107 in. Is there any USMC mission where the long range capabilities of M107 would have served better? (Here I'm starting to think of those sniper missions in '''CoD 4''' and '''MoH''') --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:12, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:::I think the best mission to have the M107 in would have been "Rock and a Hard Place," there's a lot of range in that valley. Perhaps even let you pick off officers directing things at the rear so fewer vehicles would show up. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:38, 9 December 2011 (CST)
::::In Operation Swordbreaker I sorta hoped you'd get a chance for some M107 urban action from a sniper point, taking out PLR Insurgents from afar. I'd thought big anti-material plus big city with lots of cover, be a perfect role for an Anti-Material sniper, alas it was used against you rather than use from you. Instead you just got a Mk. 11. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 11:14, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:::::Yeah, I was sad the M107 wasn't put to better use, it's the only time it appears in the ENTIRE game. The only I thing I didn't like in the SP. :( - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 16:31, 9 December 2011 (CST)

http://www.battlefield.com/images/bf3-hooah :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:02, 13 December 2011 (CST)

== Just some silliness ==

I didn't feel like uploading tons of screens for the page today so I'll put these up just for fun.
[[Image:BF3-Falcon Kick!.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Falcon Kick!''']]
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Damn, those alien bastards are gonna pay for shooting up my ride.''']]
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''I'm gonna kick your ass, bitch!''']]
- [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:00, 10 December 2011 (CST)

:Would be cool if the kick could actually have been used as a combat move like in '''F.E.A.R.''' or '''Mirror's Edge''' (also made by EA DICE) :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:42, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:More pictures with included silliness are always welcome to me :D If we could make pictures with captions as hilarious as the ones on the Far Cry 2 page, I would always come to the BF3 page whenever I'm in a bad mood xD -- Long Fallen 22:11, 11 December 2011 (CST)

::Yeah, the Far Cry 2 page is the best page ever created! :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:46, 12 December 2011 (CST)

::Wait, how do you kick? [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:37, 11 December 2011 (CST)

::You can't kick, this animation only happens when your character vaults over a low lying object, like a guardrail or a rock. -- Long Fallen 22:44, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:::Dammit. I am disappoint. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:46, 11 December 2011 (CST)

== Current Page Status / More Images ==

It's amazed me how long the game's been out yet there's still not very many images of all the weapons :/

I've unlocked all the multiplayer weapons, but unfortunately don't have a capture card for my PS3, which I think is moot since most of the current images look like they were taken on the PC's level of detail.

As of right now I love the current format the MP7's listing is in, showing off the accessories it can mount at one time, while also showing off each part of the reload animation. It would also be nice if each listing had the weapon's simple ironsights as the first image, or vice versa.

Either way, we need to make this image complete :D A game like this doesn't deserve to have such a barren imfdb page... -- Long Fallen 22:40, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:It's because the game's too fun to take the time to do it ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:43, 12 December 2011 (CST)

== HK53 ==

Is it only on the 360 version where the HK53 is, for some reason, referred to as the G53? And for some reason it comes standard with a 12x ballistic scope. It's quite amusing, the scope is as long as the gun. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 03:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:It's called G53 on PC as well. [[User:Ramell|Ramell]]
::I think the 12x is a bugged accessory, that's usually only available on those weapons for DICE Employees [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:01, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:::HK53 on PS3, hence that screenshot. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)
::::I had assumed that DICE didn't get the rights to use "HK" because in the description for all other HK guns they are referred to as "made by a German weapons manufacturer". Strange that PS3 uses the "HK".--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 12:44, 18 December 2011 (CST)
:12x Ballistic Scope? Can you take a screenshot and post it here? :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::lol sorry, I don't know the first thing about taking screenshots. I'm sure someone else here could get a screenshot. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::All the BTK guns have the DICE-only attachments unlocked by default, that is to say, all the ones you're never supposed to get. If you want screen shots I'd get them in the next month or less as they'll probly get rid of them in the next patch. 12x Scope: FAMAS, L85A2, HK53, QBZ-95B, QBB-95, MG36. Flash Suppressor: QBU-88, L96. Suppressor: Jackhammer. Note that for the Jackhammer the suppressor doesn't appear on the model in first or third person, the stats don't change, and I'm pretty sure the sound doesn't either, so really, it doesn't exist. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 10:04, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:::DICE-only? Cheating Campers >:O
:::HK53 and QBZ-95B with ballistic scope - would be funny to see :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 17 December 2011 (CST)

== "Realistic" ==

Does it annoy the hell out of anyone else when people talk about how "realistic" BF3 is, specifically compared to MW3? Yes, DICE did a much better job on the modeling and it does have a more realistic ballistics engine, but come on. Every soldier carries around an infinitely reusable parachute? People run around with defibrillators to instantly revive teammates? Somehow the Support class fits an infinite amount of ammo for every caliber in his pocket? Then, of course, every single soldier is trained to use every jet, helicopter and tank, and the jets can be used as taxis with wing mounted seating. Don't get me wrong, these are all things that add to the enjoyment of the game, and they work really well as game mechanics, but not even remotely realistic. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 06:22, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:They call it realistic because using the word "verisimilitude" makes people think you're trying to look clever for the sake of it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:27, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:Yeah, some aspects of the game are unrealistic, but think about it though. Would you really want to play a game where you run out of ammo ever 5 minutes and have to run around and just wait to die or hope you knife someone to take his weapons, and then hope he too hasn't run out of ammo? Or would you want to have to go through a Gran Turismo-esque license course to be able to use every vehicle properly? While some things are clearly over-the-top, I won't argue with that, some things are obviously put in for the gameplay value, for enjoyment. IF the developers truly wanted a realistic game, they'd have the disc eject and destroy itself after you die. Though the defibrillator comment reminded me of something my friend said, "Oh, you come back to life after getting hit directly with a tank shell! Oh here, let me revive this oatmeal!" [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:49, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:Googling "Battlefield 3 is too realistic" and getting matching results is kinda funny. For some interesting comparisons: [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FacklerScaleOfFPSRealism Fackler Scale of FPS Realism] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:28, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::As an airsofter I find it that list really funny. Classic: All FPSs / Realistic: Airsoft :D Seriously though, what I look for when I think realism is things that work how they do in real life, how they have to work, not whether they normally are or should be used in that way. BF3 is rare in that it has the following: Tac and normal reloads all done right, one in the chamber, iron sights and optics lined up/used properly, all fire modes that should be on any weapon present, switching modes does not change the gun's stats (ie switching to semi makes gun more powerful) just the mode, damage (which can never be considered fully realistic) at a reasonable level and based on the calibre, bullet travel time and drop. Now, whether the Marines have the right weapons, vehicles, or camo, and stuff like that comes second to me, because even if they don't use a certain camo, they ''could'' as opposed to one in the chamber, which '''has''' to funtion like that. Russian soldiers don't use, say SG 553s, QJY-88s, or Jackhammers, but they could, and more importantly I can, because first and foremost in mulitplayer I'm me. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 09:58, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:::Well, things like single reload animation, no +1 round in the chamber, fixed firing mode, hitscan, etc. are usually the result of engine limitations. In this regard we can see that [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite-2 Frostbite 2 Engine] is more advanced than [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite Frostbite 1 Engine] (which already had bullet physics; although magcount and overheating from [http://www.moddb.com/engines/refractor-2 Refractor 2 Engine] are absent; it would have also been nice if there were interchangeable magazines). Regarding the equipment it shows how much there [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DidNotDoTheResearch didn't do the research] and [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShownTheirWork shown their work]. Me wants [[Project Reality]] for BF3 :| --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:02, 17 December 2011 (CST)

:I'm not saying that it isn't realistic in some specific areas, sure it is, but it's a video game, and to compare it to COD and say BF is more realistic is kind of like comparing Star Trek to Star Wars and saying Star Trek is more realistic because they used the word "tachyon". That being said, I think all four examples I just used are very evertaining. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 04:56, 16 December 2011 (CST)

== Javelins are the best. ==

Javelin + CITV station on a tank = fantastic combination. The top down fire mode makes killing LAVs and Amtraks, especially on Noshair (sp?) Canals easy, not to mention the massively amusing ability to fire on laser painted aircraft. It's always hilarious to watch an FA/18 blow up and the guy flying just sees FGM-148 Javelin killed him and he wonders what just happened. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 02:22, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:Oh my, sounds like tracer darting in BC2 o_O --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:56, 18 December 2011 (CST)

::And CITV Station + MBT Guided Shells! Lock, fire, triple kill on one Little Bird! Lock, fire, quad on the other. I was 7/0 20 seconds into the game! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:14, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::It's even better against a jet. I just try to imagine the expression on a pilot's face as he wonders how the hell an Abrams just shot down his Flanker. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)

:The Javelins may be the best, however, setting up the SOFLAM is akin to setting yourself up with giant neon lights pointing "I'M RIGHT HERE!" to the enemies. I'm sure DICE had good intentions when programming it so that it wouldn't be ridiculously common and spammy, but it just sort of defeats the point of giving it to the stealthy ninja that the Recon class should be. Not to mention it gets even less useful on Wake Island with the mobile AA guns shooting the bright red light visible from just about any distance with the fury of a thousand angry Russians armed with PPSh's. :/ -- Long Fallen 22:32, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::Oh, the Tunguska, which has the ability of firing every bullet ever made at the same time?[[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::Haha, is there any other? -- Long Fallen 01:26, 20 December 2011 (CST)

== 9K22 Tunguska ==

I've actually just realized that while the page is mostly (half) complete, the 9K22 Tunguska's armaments haven't been added to the page; because I'd like to know exactly how much ammunition for its guns it carries and approximately for how long would it waste it all before running out, since it's a mobile AA platform? -- Long Fallen 01:36, 20 December 2011 (CST)
:Ammunition capacity is 1,904, combined rate of fire is variable between 3,900 and 5,000 rounds per minute, so if we take the lower rate of fire this works out to about 30 seconds of continuous firing. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:45, 20 December 2011 (CST)

::[[Image:2a38m.jpg|thumb|none|400px|2A38M Autocannon - 30x165mm]]
::Example image in case anyone feels like adding. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:36, 22 December 2011 (CST)

== Added a piece of info about the M1014 ==

It's really inaccurate for even a shotgun. I've patterned my shotgun in real life which also has a cylinder bore and the pattern was half the size of the pattern in game. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:46, 20 December 2011 (CST)

:This "short-range shotgun" problem is sadly common in video games, to the point which the TVTropes website has a page just for it. And Frag-12 rounds for the shotguns in this game are horribly overpowered too. I'd take a tighter pattern with a realistic damage-drop-off with distance with buckshot if they could tone down the Frag-12 rounds. For a more realistic shotgun, try playing SWAT 4. You can actually snipe somewhat well with a Benelli Nova in that game if you crouch and wait to become fully accurate.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 20:55, 21 December 2011 (CST)

:SWAT4... It's the same game that also has handgun sniping and guns that do less damage at point blank range. I was disappointed with the 1911 in that game sadly. :( I'd be careful advising anyone to play that game; its mechanics are ungodly finicky. -- Long Fallen 22:23, 21 December 2011 (CST)

::You could snipe with handguns in Battlefield 2 too... That was actually a tactic employed by experienced BF2 snipers: shoot the enemy with bolt-action sniper rifle and then immediately switch to pistol and finish him off ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:20, 22 December 2011 (CST)

:Meh, SWAT 4 isn't as finicky with its mechanics if you know what you're doing. The damage with its guns is somewhat random to reflect how bullets in real life don't always perform as expected (i.e., JHPs clog with clothing and fail to expand, 5.56mm FMJ fails to fragment once inside a target if the bullet isn't properly constructed or the barrel it's fired from is too short, etc.). though I will admit that the M1911 and other .45 ACP guns are underpowered in that game. But I think the reason as to why "handgun sniping" has persisted up until now is that modelling ballistic physics for bullets en masse was only possible when the right programming and hardware appeared. The BF2 example was probably implemented as well given the limited draw distance of the engine; without an omnipresent zoom system to represent how your eyes can focus on far-off objects (like in ARMA 2) the limitations of pixels on our monitors means that enemies become unrecognizable jumbles of pixels at distances we would still be able to clearly see them in real life. Also, because adjustable sights are hard to model in games (as opposed to scopes with ballistic drop markings), pistols often don't have ballistic drop either. I tried compensating for ballistic drop while shooting pistols in the STALKER series--because the iron sights on pistols can't be adjusted it's very difficult, since essentially the muzzle will obscure your target when you aim high to compensate.

:But the sooner we get realistic shotgun buckshot spreads and ranges in games, the better. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 14:02, 22 December 2011 (CST)

::The problem is, the zoom system only activates when you press a button. So any time you don't, the environment is presented in its distant form. This gives an edge to the person who secured a position and now zooms in in the enemy direction, while the enemy is on the move and can't see said person. In reality, they should see each other evenly. I like this absence of bionic eyes in [[Project Reality]]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:26, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:So you have to hold down the button in ARMA2 to focus on distant objects? Well, a toggle system would be much better (probably combined with using a "dynamic zoom" system that used your mouse wheel or two keys to zoom in and out so you could vary the amount of zoom much like your eyes can focus across a great deal of ranges). Still, given the pixellation problem that I mentioned earlier, all PCs in Project Reality have to carry binoculars so as to focus on distant targets, but these cannot be combined with weaponry, so if you're using a kit that has no optics for your gun and are trying to hit something that you can't really see unmagnified (even though in real life you would be able to see and hit a target at that distance), tough luck. Project Reality is also going in the process of making a version based on the ARMA2 engine as well. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 18:17, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::Adjustable Zoom would be nice. Sadly, developers haven't yet caught the idea. Even adjustable FOV is not in every modern shooter (and where it is, it might be limited).
::It works both ways in PR: you have problems seeing an enemy in the distance and an enemy has problems seeing you ;) And yes, I'm aware of PR for ArmA II. [http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-reality-arma2 It's currently v0.1], right at the starting line. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:47, 24 December 2011 (CST)

== M1014 magazine tube length ==

Can someone explain to me what's going on with the magazine tube length of the M1014 in-game? The weapon art models show the typical length, but in-game, the magazine length looks like a M3. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 13:12, 27 December 2011 (CST)

The pump action shotguns in the game start with four round mag tubes. Therefore the art models depict them as such. However, when you unlock "Extended Magazines", the in world model changes to the six round tube for both the Remington and the Benelli.--[[User:GLOCK10mil|GLOCK10mil]] 16:18, 27 December 2011 (CST)

:Didn't think of that. Thank you. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 17:03, 27 December 2011 (CST)

== UMP trigger group ==

It seems the world model for the H&K UMP has safe, semi-auto, and full auto, even though the in-game weapon operates with a selectable 2-round burst.--[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 14:53, 28 December 2011 (CST)
:If that's true than it is an error, though the UMP ''can'' have a full/2/semi/safe trigger group. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:32, 28 December 2011 (CST)

== Back To Karkand Weapons ==

So I've been playing B2K a lot, and I've gathered a bunch of trivia about some of the guns that could be added to the page, but I'm not so knowledgable about them so I thought I'd leave them here so someone who knows more can add them into the page.

The L85A2 has three round burst as well as auto and semi, which as far as I know it doesn't in real life. It also can't mount the M320 which, again as far as I know, is the grenade launcher it mounts in real life. It's also 'cocked' by pressing a bolt release just above the magwell.

The FAMAS also has burst as well as semi and auto, again I don't know if this is true in real life.

Both the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B and burst as well as automatic and semi, but I'll admit I know nothing about these weapons. The QBZ-95B and the QBU-88 are reloaded similarly to the AN94/AEK-971 (new mag is used to push the mag release and then inserted) and it looks absolutely bizarre in first person because they're bullpup.

Also, the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B are chambered in 5.45x39mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm and the QBU-88 is chambered in 7.62x54mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm.

That's all I've got [[User:Nikonov|Nikonov]] 18:17, 9 January 2012 (CST)

:The FAMAS does have all three, and a lot of the info screens are wrong or somewhat wrong, pretty sure they're just copy-pasting errors as opposed to them not knowing the calibre. Everything else you said is correct as far as I know. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:34, 9 January 2012 (CST)

::Well, if they are copy-pasting errors then someone should tweet Demize about it ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:10, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::The reload animation for those Chinese rifles doesn't use the magazine to push the old mag out. The character pulls out a new mag and pulls the old one out with just his fingers but has the magazine in hand to load into the gun right after. I saw a video of it with an AK once.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:49, 9 January 2012 (CST)

::I'm assuming DICE watched this video, I don't have a clue if this is what they teach in the PLA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMmaIZ8Umnk--[[User:Mattatack92|Mattatack92]] 00:40, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:IRL L85A2 mounts not [http://www.hk-usa.com/-images/products/m320/lg_m320_3.jpg M320] but a different variant of AG36, called [http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v470/Black_Hawk_169/DSC00005.jpg UGL]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:07, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::I just Tweeted Demize about the calibre and ROFs being sometimes wrong for the BTK guns. :) Also, he says he's not going to add the HK79 and GL1 due to memory issues, which is fair. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:16, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:::That would make a nice "GL Pack" DLC though: GL1, HK79, M203, UGL... And more, should the carbines get corresponding rifle variants :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:20, 11 January 2012 (CST)

Also interesting, the QBZ-95's ironsights glitch when you fire. Actually helps. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:23, 10 January 2012 (CST)

I don't have a Twitter, could someone suggest something small on the HUD on hardcore modes that show what fire mode your gun is set to? I change it a lot and the guns with three settings make it difficult.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:43, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:I agree, and Tweeted :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:56, 11 January 2012 (CST)
::Would be kind of cool if in hardcore mode you could actually look down at your weapon and see the fire selector or check how many rounds are in the magazine. If you think having no HUD is "hardcore," just imagine having to actually worry about taking your eyes off the battleground long enough to check on your weapon like that. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:14, 22 January 2012 (CST)

== Pancor Jackhammer ==

Why? Not only is this weapon relatively pointless since they included the USAS-12 (it seems to recoil less and that's about it) but it comes with a freaking suppressor. Of all the useless devices you can equip to a weapon as insanely loud as the Jackhammer theoretically would be, this and an under-barrel can opener would just about top the list. (I presume they put it on there because the revolving magazine system of the Jackhammer has some similarities to that of a Nagant M1895.) Also, why in the hell is the freaking thing even in the game? There's supposedly a grand total of two of the dumb things in existence. If we're going to throw in an automatic shotgun prototype that never made it into production, how about the H&K CAWS? That one was actually tested by the US military. In another world, it could have been adopted. Or, hell, the Atchisson AA-12. Don't get me wrong, the Jackhammer is a cool looking gun, but it never made it off the design bench and I'm a ''little'' tired of seeing it crop up in video games claiming at least some level of real world veracity (the world "realistic" is a silly one to use for FPS games). [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:24, 22 January 2012 (CST)
:It's supposed to be for the nostalgia, I guess, since it was an unlockable in BF2. Much like them keeping that "DAO-12" name for the Protecta, though it's now a Street Sweeper. There were actually quite a few Jackhammer prototypes, but only two that fired fullauto. Or rather didn't, which is why there were only two. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:38, 22 January 2012 (CST)

:They will put XM8 as military tested weapon, methinks. CAWS was pretty cool gun in [[Jagged Alliance 2]] :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:52, 22 January 2012 (CST)

::As stated, it's in because it was in BF2, that's the point of the Back To Karkand pack. Also, it doesn't actually have a suppressor. Well, it does, but it's invisible and does not change any stats whatsoever, not even making you not appear on the minimap. So, there's just a pretend option for a suppressor. Why? Same reason the two ARs, two Carbines, and two MGs have 12x scopes, and the two Sniper Rifles have Flash Suppressors: it was an oversight, those are the attachments you're supposed to ''never'' get those attachments, only DICE gets them, because they're silly. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:10, 22 January 2012 (CST)

Well the suppressor actually does do something, it cuts damage down. I actually like the Pancor though, with frag rounds, ext mags, and a Holo sight I can clear out most hallways on metro. But, that is pretty much the only map it is of any use on.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 16:47, 22 January 2012 (CST)

:::Oh geez, way for me to miss the obvious. I forgot about it being in BF2, having not played the "older" games in quite a while. (Why does 2005 seem so long ago?) Actually, I was a little sad that B2K didn't include the option to hijack semi-trucks and civilian cars like you could with the Armored Fury booster pack. At least you can borrow a Bobcat on Wake Island and try to run enemy soldiers down with it for nothing other than sheer comedy value... And the other "weird" attachments (okay, maybe not the flash suppressor) are at least ''sort of'' useful. You can be extremely annoying with the MG36 fitted with a 12x - no sniper likes dodging nearly-accurate long range machine gun fire, and anything that snipers don't like is fine with me. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 04:26, 4 February 2012 (CST)

== Dog Tag Weapons ==
I vote we add a section either at the bottom of the page for all of them, or at the end of each class of weapons for them, because there are a LOT of guns on dog tags that aren't actually in the game. (SAA, SCAR-L, proper MG36, standard FAMAS, that weird suppressed Makarov PM variant, M203, and lots more) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:25, 26 January 2012 (CST)
:If no one objects to this, I'm going to create a sub-catagory at the bottom of each weapon class (SMG, shotgun, etc) that has all the Dog Tag-only weapons, because this page will get very confusing if we don't, as none of those weapons are in the game, just pictures of them. So far (of the top of my head) Makarov PB, Single Action Army, M1911A1, SPAS-12, SCAR-L, FAMAS (standard), M203, M16A2, M16A1, MG36 (proper). I'm sure there are more, but that's what I can think of right now. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:45, 4 February 2012 (CST)
::I've added everything I know of, but there are probably more. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:46, 8 February 2012 (CST)

== Patch is still yet to reach Xbox it appears ==

It appears as though the Xbox has been forgotten since the AN 94 still just has two fire modes and the HK416 still has it's three fire modes. Does anyone know more about it than me? --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:59, 17 February 2012 (CST)

:Yeah, we never got that patch that the other two platforms did. I'm assuming it'll be rolled into the patch that was originally supposed to come out for all platforms this month, but is now going to be in March at the earliest. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:57, 18 February 2012 (CST)

::Nope, here on the PS3 it's still the same, three-mode HK416 and two-mode AN94. DICE has gone on to say that across all consoles the stats are very different; however, the next patch will put all weapons on equal ground across all platforms. -- Long Fallen 02:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== All Fancy Right Side Dog Tags ==
I'm going to add this to the page soon, to replace the Dog Tag Weapons sections I made before, but right now I need sleep. They're sorted by the name of the real weapon in game, not in game name and not name of weapon in the picture, if those are different. If any of you can figure out what the not-actually-a-QBB-95 is, let me know :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:36, 1 March 2012 (CST)

[[Image:BF3_500KillGuns.jpg|thumb|none|650px]]

:You have no idea how grateful I am to see this in a neat compilation! Been looking everywhere for just these designs to no avail. -- Long Fallen 02:46, 2 March 2012 (CST)
I think the QBB-95 is a totally made up frankengun. However the core of it is actually an Enfield L85, you can tell by the vent holes on the receiver: 3 horizontal vents at the rear, then a slightly larger gap followed by two slightly smaller vents. Also visible is the raised portion on the bottom edge of the upper receiver which runs horizontally under these vent holes, and the pistol grip and trigger guard seem to match. On top it seems to be a grossly oversized M4/M16A4 detachable carry handle, and the front is anyone's guess. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:56, 2 March 2012 (CST)
::Yeah, I think you're right. It also has the generic bipod most guns in BF3 use, Harris Bipod I think it's called. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== Flash Suppresor ==
I know this is really not important and probably no one cares, but I think the flash suppresor may be a Vltor VC-1. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 17:15, 1 March 2012 (CST)
:You found it! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:28, 1 March 2012 (CST)

::Not important? Any info is very welcome on this site! In fact, I was wondering this myself. -- Long Fallen 02:48, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== 3 Expansions planned for BF3 ==

[http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/03/07/battlefield-3-close-quarters-announced.aspx 3 Expansions planned for BF3]

Newest expansion has 10 new guns, what are you guys thinking/hoping they will be? I'm hoping for a USP, perhaps another pump action shotgun,maybe a TAR or a Galil, and an XM8 (wishful thinking on that last one, but they put the Jackhammer in, so why not?) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 18:20, 7 March 2012 (CST)

EDIT: Can someone fix that link please? I'm not very good at this clearly.

Me being the AR fanboy that I am, I just want a short barreled AR (10 inches prefferably). cheech98 9:28, 7 March 2012

:HK416. I'd like to see another pump shotty and some pistols at the least. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:49, 7 March 2012 (CST)

::Already spoken for; the M416 is the 10" 416.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 18:16, 8 March 2012 (CST)

Definitely a pump shotgun, maybe an Ithica or a Mossberg with wood furniture (because with black furniture it would look too much like the 870). I would like to see an AK in 7.62x39. I was honestly appalled that BF3 didn't feature a .30 cal AK. An MP5, a Hi-Power, a CZ-75 and a SIG-Sauer would also be nice; a non-tacticool FAL, maybe an FNC (always loved that gun), a Skorpion (come on, who doesn't wanna shoot that thing in a video game), the VZ-58, the HK P7 perhaps? The HK33 would be an awesome weapon to see (although admittedly not too plausible), an Uzi (full size or mini, doesn't really matter to me), a Makarov (still common among the Russian Armed Forces, right?), the P99, and MORE REVOLVERS, DAMMIT. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 02:04, 8 March 2012 (CST)
:Yeah, I think if they added the FAL, it wouldn't be tacticool, seeing as how the G3A3 wasn't. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 1:32, 11 March 2012 (PST)

:Rumours are circulating that two such weapons in Close Quarters Pack are the CZ-75 Automatic is one such pistol as a competition towards the G18 and 93R and a new sniper rifle, the CZ-750 for the Recon. Also two new vehicles rumored are the UH-60 Blackhawk and M2A2 Bradley IFV. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 10:07, 9 March 2012 (CST)

::But isn't the CQ Pack gonna take place entirely indoors? I'm pretty sure it said somewhere that the four maps in the next pack are going to feture entirely infantry-based, indoors combat. I guess I could see a helicopter working in there somewhere (thinking of the Airport map's chopper-gunners on MW2, I suppose) but it seems like vehicles would break the tense, room-to-room air they're going for here. [[User:Sopher|Sopher]] 3:56, 13 March 2012 (EST)

The HK33 is actually in the game already, in the Back to Karkand expansion pack as the 'G53' or something like that. *EDIT* Nevermind, you meant the full size rifle, my mistake...
--[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 12:28, 8 March 2012 (CST)

It's gonna be a bunch of CQB guns, no doubt. I'd like to see (Assault Rifles) Tavor TAR-21 and the Masada. (Carbines) AKMs and the AUG A3. (Machine Guns) LSAT and the IMI Negev (Snipers) VSS Vintorez and the DSR-1 (Submachine Guns)MP5 PDW and the Colt R0991 9mm. --[[User:Commander Lukas|Commander Lukas]] 16:28, 8 March 2012 (CST)

There's gonna be AT least 30 weapons or more tops in each of the three packs over a period of this year, I think we are going to have our hands full identifying all them because it ain't just firearms either, they're adding a slew of vehicles with each pack as is the norm with this supposed DLC's. "Close quarters" I think is mostly gonna be all transport vehicles so I suspect, possibly Technicals, Civilian Vehicles, maybe an aerial transport helicopter/plane or light attack scout helicopters, possibly light IFV's too. Weapons are likely to be CQB in nature, I'm hoping for alot of Sub-Machine Gun's and Shotguns, the game needs more Pump Shotguns in my opinion. My general wish-list includes:

* SA58 OSW Battle Rifle and Type 95 Assault Rifle (to round out the Chinese Firepower in BF3, almost the full collection now) for the Assault Kit
* Zastava M92 (Compact AK47 Variant) and the Mark 18 Mod 0 (Ultra compact AR) and possibly the QLZ-87 Automatic Grenade Launcher (as an Anti-Vehicle Weapon, replaces the Rocket Launcher) for the Engineer
* MG3 GPMG and L86A2 (Equivalent to BF3's RPK and M27, gotta have more weapons like those for the Support Kit)
* Mark 12 SPR (American equivalent of the SKS in BF3) and CZ-750 for the Recon
* CZ-75 Auto, H&K MP5, Mossberg 590 Pump Shotgun (if it was a secondary for the Assault I'd be in love with it), TOZ-194, Valtro PM-5, Sawn Off Double Barrel, Benelli M3 Super 90, Smith & Wesson 686, SIG P226, H&K USP, QSZ-92 and FN Five SeveN are just some examples of all kit weapons I'd love to see.

[[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 10:56, 9 March 2012 (CST)
:If they added the QLZ-87, it would be '''''WAY''''' overpowered. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 7:28, 12 March 2012 (PST)

:Dunno about the QLZ-87, man. I'd think most Battlefield players are already sick of overpowered, hand-held weapons that can auto-fire frags. [[User:Sopher|Sopher]] 4:03, 13 March 2012 (EST)

"There's gonna be AT least 30 weapons or more tops in each of the three packs over a period of this year"<br/>
Thirty weapons in each pack? Are you kidding me? BtK had eight weapons. And how do you know all the packs will have weapons in?[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 12:37, 9 March 2012 (CST)
:Actually, BtK had ten weapons, and he meant at least 30 overall, he just stated it wrong. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 3:28, 9 March 2012 (PST)

They just released a new trailer that shows off some of the weapons in the first expansion pack, I only saw two but there may be more hidden throughout, the ones I saw were the L86A1 and the ACR(I assume it was the ACR, it was however called "ACW-R", I'm seeing a trend with Magpul weapons here with the PDR being renamed the PDW-R. (PS. sorry if I screwed up the formatting, this is my first entry.)
After further searching the complete list seems to be AUG, SPAS-12, ACW-R(ACR), L86A1 LSW, LSAT, MTAR-21, SCAR-L. However some people claim to have spotted the CZ-75 Auto. [[User:Spry|Spry]] 12:38, 13 March 2012 (CET)

:Good catch Spry, I watched the trailer twice carefully and found the same. I'll make it a list so it's easier to see. As with Karkand we should avoid adding anything new to the main page until we have more to add. I'm assuming the same weapon layout as Karkand until I hear something solid about that full auto CZ-75, maybe it has a stock and is a PDW? I'm also assuming what go to what classes, can't really go wrong there. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 11:47, 13 March 2012 (CDT)

*Assault: ACW-R (ACR)
*Assault: AUG (variant unknown)
*Engineer: MTAR-21
*Engineer: SCARL-L (misspelling, tweeted Demize)
*Support: L86A1
*Support: LSAT
*Recon: ???
*Recon: ???
*All Kit: ??? (SMG)
*All Kit: SPAS-12

::I'm excited to see the AUG and the MTAR, but the ACR and SCAR-L... while I have nothing against them (in fact, I really like them) aren't they a bit... implausible? As for the LSAT... HELL. NO. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 19:15, 13 March 2012 (CDT)

Talk:Battlefield 3

2012-03-14T00:15:17Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* 3 Expansions planned for BF3 */

See [[Talk:Battlefield 3/Archive 1]] for older discussions.

__TOC__

== Why am I not surprised? ==

Part of me isn't too surprised that the CODMW3 article would be taken off the Work in Progress Status in a much shorter time than BF3's page. Personally I think MW3 committed a war crime with how atrocious the M16A4 looks both in the first person and 3rd person models of it. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:00, 16 November 2011

:Just the M16? :/ Hell, the P99 is the only pistol where they didn't get something wrong. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:14, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:It has more to do with the fact that MW3 makes more mistakes and therefore is far more fun to write about. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:18, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::My personal favourite screw up in MW3 has to be the Skorpion's scope rail mount, with the "MG36" as a close runner up. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 03:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::I still mad about the fact they suddenly decided that it'll better that the M4A1 will have a 20-round magazine rather than a 30-round magazine -_- --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 03:05, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:::Lol good points all around. I'm not too knowledgeable on everything but I'm in the service and I use the M16A4 often. So it stuck out like a sore thumb the moment I picked up the rifle in the game that something was really freaking off about it. Like it wasn't already bad having 30 rounds come out of a 20 round mag. But bolt on rails to A2 Handguards? Really?! XDDD I don't know how accurate that P99 is, but it irks the hell out of me seeing it held one handed in the First Person Model. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:25 16 November 2011

Ya know? It's funny that the "fact" they are using military advisers to make the game better in "tactics" and stuff (yeah, right), this military advisers or what ever, aren't aware of the way the developers model the weapons and doesn't 100% reassemble to the real life one's :/ I guess the developers tell them "We don't really give a damn about realism, just tell us how the hell modern warfare works"... Still, the guys of BF3 made a bit better, though it does have also many things unrealistic, like the fact Marines are using M16A3's instead of M16A4's, and some of them running with an M240 like it a was wooden gun. Sigh. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 02:57, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:The thing about an advisor is that his job is to answer questions. It's up to the developers if they a) ask him the right questions and b) pay attention to his answers. I believe ''Star Trek's'' science advisors have publically complained that they're only asked for advice on what terminology to use and never on whether something is actually good science. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:15, 16 November 2011 (CST)

One thing SP Campaign of BF3 proves is that BF3 shouldn't have SP Campaign in the first place. One would expect it to be more authentic, yet it takes approach of CoD: "We just put randomly weapons we have in MP whether or not they fit in". So suddenly we have Marines with M16A3s and M240Bs (instead of M16A4s and M240Gs), insurgents (exactly insurgents and not organized militia from pre-alpha trailers) with AK-74Ms and AEK-971s (instead of AK-47s / AKMs), Spetsnaz member Vladimir with 5.56 A-91 (despite Russian forces simply not using this caliber even for SF), etc. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:27, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:Let's not forget that the protagonist of the game, Blackburn, during the interrogations scenes, you can see his name and branch tags that they're in white and straight rather than MARPAT and in an angle with the chest pockets. Also, one of the the guys in Blackburn's team, though I can't remember his exact name (the guy who carries M136 all the time), wears MultiCam OCP, still, rather than MARPAT uniform. Eventually, war games wouldn't be realistic as real life, even in the small parts. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 11:22, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Except my games (If I ever make games). :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 11:34, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Plus, they (Marines) get CAS from Little Birds. Apparently, to the game devs the terms 'US Army' and 'USMC' are interchangeable. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:50, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:I don't recall the insurgents using AEK-971s in the Iran missions, usually it was a random stew of your typical AKS-74u, AK-74M (don't real militants from the former Soviet bloc use the more modern 5.45 AK-74 at times?), RPKs, and the KH2002. However, the terrorists with Solomon from later on in the story do use all this, and even more somewhat outlandish equipment. Also, since the page is incomplete, can you explain to me how you identify the Marine's M16 models as the A3 versions? During the campaign I recall Blackburn's M16 as being able to fire in fully automatic. (Except that one mission where you inexplicably jump off with an HK416) Also, didn't Vladimir use the AS VAL throughout the Spetsnaz missions? And although it's not top-notch realistic Ala ''The Hurt Locker'', I wouldn't exactly outright call it the CoD approach. I mean, just look at what they did with Black Ops. Pointing out every inaccuracy in that game is to the point of turning it into a drinking game. Long Fallen 17:49, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Other than that one HK416 Blackburn had, which was odd, if they worst things the Marines had were M16A3s instead of A4s and M240Bs instead of M240Gs, then I'm happy enough. And the PLR only had 74Ms, 74Us, and RPKs if I remember correctly, the later enemies had AEKs. All the weird guns were given to Kaffarov's private army, as he is an arms dealer. It's like complaining you see a few M1928s instead of M1A1s in a WWII movie. Black Ops.. is Black Ops, and MW3 had FADs in the hands of African militia... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:20, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Maybe it is related to the "AKS-74U vs. UMP issue": in some of the videos of "Operation Swordbreaker", inside of the building, leading to anti-sniper position, one of the insurgents is certainly equipped with AEK-971, with others having AKS-74U and AK-74M (AK-74 would be correct for former Soviet bloc militant but not AK-74M unless he managed to scavenge it from Russian soldier). For M16A3, check one of the Marines on the way to bridge in the same mission. And while Kiril used the AS "Val", Vladimir used the 5.56 A-91. And yes, as Alex said, Black Ops... is Black Ops *sadface* --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:17, 17 November 2011 (CST)

:::You are right, that one insurgent always has an AEK, but that's an exception. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:31, 17 November 2011 (CST)

Cod always screws up the guns
:What does that have to do with Battlefield 3? [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:12, 22 January 2012 (CST)

== Sidearms ==

Has anyone else noticed Campo carries ''two'' sidearms, one on his chest and one by his hip? Looks like two Glocks.

[[Image:BF3-Glock-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Ten more and he'll be a Glockenspiel.]]

[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:18, 18 November 2011 (CST)

:I'm sorry, but that caption was just too good. On topic however, it seems as if the handgun holstered on his chest seems pretty low res to be made out. Could it be a designer oversight or something? - Long Fallen 17:21, 18 November 2011 (CST)

::Maybe they are copying Epps from [[Transformers: Dark of the Moon]], he nonsensically carries a pair of Glocks in the same way as well... --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 18 November 2011 (CST)

::Well, that's the Assault kit's chest, with the Glock and all, so they most likely gave him a leg holster and forgot about that one. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:01, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:::It's like in MW2 where the snipers carry unusable M1911. Although it is peculiar that the Marine in this game carries unusable Glock and not M9 or MEU(SOC). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:17, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== BTK Weapons ==

Finally! http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg

:MG36 and Jackhammer? Guess the XM8 and plasma rifle will be in the next DLC. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:30, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:I guess that confirms that there will be no PLA Faction DLC *sadface* I still hope for EU Faction :|
:Also confirmed that HK53 is back intact :)
:--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Why do they choose to include the "HK" prefix in the HK53, but not on the M416? [[User:Santos|Santos]] 11:26, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:::I'll ask Demize why this HK is okay (and the HK21 in BF2). Actually, they hinted they might do more weapon DLCs later, so I'm expecting a "Back To Bad Company" pack with all three XM8s and other stuff. Also, not a plasma rifle, but I've always thought it'd be cool to see Halo guns in another game, the human ones. For those of you that don't know, they all make functional sense. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:48, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::::lol yeah all those functional Spartan Lasers we have lying around. Though it would be cool to see an NTW-20 in a videogame. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:45, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:::::[http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle Have] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle1 you] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle2 said] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle3 NTW-20]? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:34, 12 December 2011 (CST)

== RPK ==

Incidentally, I need to check if the RPK-74 has a flash hider. If not, with wood furniture and a ribbed metal magazine, it's actually an RPK with a sight rail, not a -74 at all. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:10, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Maybe I didn't spend enough time using it, but I remember it having black furniture. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:44, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Checking my PS3 video captures it's very dark brown; more to the point, though, it's got that standard AK-style handguard with two holes through the middle (with a RIS foregrip sticking out the bottom, admittedly); the -M polymer handguard is a different shape and has ridges all along the top of the gas tube.

::[[Image:Soviet RPK-74.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK-74 light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]
::[[Image:rpk74m.jpg|thumb|none|601px|RPK-74M light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]
::[[File:BF3-RPK-1.jpg|thumb|none|601px|]]

::If it doesn't have a flash hider, I think that makes it an RPK. I thought I could see one there, but in my PS3 video it looks like it doesn't have one and the in-world and pickup models don't have one either. I was going to say "except the scope mount" but MPM's RPK image has one:

::[[Image:RPK lmg.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK Light Machine Gun with 40 round magazine - 7.62x39mm]]

::Is this normal? From what I'd read the scope bracket was an -M thing. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:35, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::Thanks for clearing up the RPK differences, as for the scope rail, scopes are nice to have sometimes, I'm sure some of the older RPKs were fitted with scope mounts as aftermarket parts in real life. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:06, 20 November 2011 (CST)
::::As the RPK in the game only has the bracket fitted when a sight is there, I would certainly put it in the "aftermarket" category. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:37, 20 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Oh right, just like the AKS-74U becomes an AKS-74UN when mounted with optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:47, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Just to assure you this ''does'' happen (it's so nice having a PS3 video of half the game to pull shots from):

:[[Image:BF3-RPKForegrip.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

:RPK with inexplicable foregrip. I'd just forgotten they don't all have that. Also, is it just me or is the scope mounting screwed to the side of the dust cover rather than attached to a bracket? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)

== Single Action Army ==

Just letting you guys know, as stated on its page it is called Single Action Army on this site as there are so many nearly identical replicas calling it the more correct Colt 1873 might actually be wrong, and SAA is used as a catch-all term. However, just as we assume a full-size Glock is a 17 unless we can tell otherwise, we also assume a gun in a game is not a clone, unless we can tell otherwise. Therefore, it is assumed that the drawing of the SAA is the original Colt 1873, and should be named as such. This is just to avoid an edit war, or something. :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== M224 ==

I don't know about Xbox, but on the PS3 the M224 definitely has an M7 baseplate in multiplayer. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 15:54, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Yup, it has one on 360. Lol at the baseplate having a designation :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:19, 19 November 2011 (CST)
:::Just about everything in the military has a designation. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:10, 10 March 2012 (CST)

::Feel free to change it, I was going off it not having one in single. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:31, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== Kaffarov's Private Army ==

While I understand that Kaffarov is an arms dealer, it boggles my mind how so many times in fiction there are people who are able to procure such military spec equipment like the F2000, Mk.17 (SCAR-H), AEK-971, and so many others. Surely the companies and or countries that produce them don't freely sell them to whatever buyers there are? My question is how would people like Kaffarov even be able to avoid the system and acquire such equipment? I don't know if it has been answered elsewhere, or for obvious reasons '''hasn't''', but it's just something that I haven't been able to explain logically. -- Long Fallen 18:03, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Reminds me of [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Legionnaire Legionnaire] from [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Battlefield:_Bad_Company Battlefield: Bad Company]. And that guy paid his mercenaries in ''gold bars'', mind you. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Kaffarov... Makarov... Kaffarov... Makarov... Is it only me or does BF3 is trying to copy MW3 in many matters? :/ --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 23:29, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Um, what's so suspicious about Russian (or Russified) surname ending in -ev or -ov? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::I'm not sure either, but it lets us have the cool guns people don't really use, so it gets a pass in my books. Also, those two names aren't really that similar, and the characters are nothing alike. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:12, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:To answer the question, no. Any customer who could afford top-drawer equipment would be dealing directly with the company that made it, the kinds of people who go to dodgy arms dealers want weapons that are simple enough to equip illiterate militiamen with, cheap enough to equip a ''lot'' of them with, and have widely available spare parts and ammunition. It's no longer the era when unpaid former Soviet commanders would empty entire arms depots onto the black market and flee to countries that don't have extradition treaties with Russia, and no longer the era when you could get a superpower to pony up a whole bunch of equipment and training just by saying you were fighting for / against communism. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:46, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::I see, but I recall this story from a few years back -[http://www.expatica.com/be/news/local_news/factory-tightens-security-after-gun-thefts-23226.html Stolen Five-seveNs from FNH factories] (I had no idea the P90 was a handgun xD) - And then there's this too -[http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20081112_worrying_signs_border_raids Mexican drug cartels being armed with P90s and Five-seveNs] So I still want to know, what are the likely chances of seeing terrorists with such equipment? I mean, these articles seem to bring it to light. (Sorry if I'm going off topic) -- Long Fallen 00:42, 21 November 2011 (CST)

:::With Mexico it's a situation where a lot of the top-class armament is purchased in the United States and smuggled across the border; similar arrangements were used to smuggle arms to the IRA during The Troubles in Northern Ireland. That's the "buying directly from the supplier" kind of deal, and is usually done without a dealer acting as an intermediary (because the Cartels have enough money to do it themselves, or take the weapons in part payment for supplying product to drug dealers). Your typical Eastern Bloc / African arms dealer just buys up weapons somewhere a war is ending and ships them to where a war is still going on, because the buyers don't have the contacts, legitimacy or resources to do it by themselves. A lot of the guns these guys circulate have been involved in local conflicts for years or even decades.

:::Top-end hardware typically comes from governments and organisations. Insurgents in Iraq didn't get top-of-the-line anti-tank weapons and training in making IEDs from some guy in the business of moving weapons, they got them from sympathisers in places like Iran. Alarmism about what ''kind'' of weapons terrorists have is pretty foolish anyway, since generally they prefer the instant, indiscriminate destruction of explosives to trying to shoot people with a gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::::Ah, I see, thanks for enlightening me :) -- Long Fallen 20:25, 21 November 2011 (CST)

Whoever said "a lot of the top-class armament...blah blah Mexico... smuggled from US..." is rather wrong. The Mexican cartels who have P90s and M16s and etc western weaponry are getting it from the Mexican military and police, only a small percentage of the guns near the US border are actually smuggled in to Mexico from the US. The numbers seem higher because recently Mexico has been sending in stores of arms they have confiscated over the past X amount of years (that they know can be most likely traced to the US) to get traced at the same time. This leads to a overblown number that looks good on anti-firearms pamphlets. If you think about it a bit, what do you think would be easier and cheaper:

1. Finding and paying someone to buy 10 semi-automatic guns in the US at ridiculous prices, risking him getting caught, losing your money, going through all the background checks, etc, then sneaking them over the border. Not to mention finding ammo.

Or

2a. Paying some guerrillas in some SA country x amount of dope to bring in a ship, container, truck, or plane full of 100s or 1000s of eastern bloc or former US military weaponry, that is most likely going to be fully automatic. Plus large quantities of ammo for said weaponry.

2b. Stealing or buying from a corrupt military/ police official brand new weaponry.

The "X% of guns in Mexico are from the US" myth is a fallacy created by the Mexican and US govts and heavily compounded by the ATF smuggling them themselves or letting them walk, and the FBI for not laying out the specifics of the stats. Then the subsequent (ratings improving) media hype compounds it further.

Not saying it doesn't happen, just that it is greatly exaggerated.

Now as for how someone like Kaffarov would get the weaponry, its pretty simple. 1. Start a (possibly dummy) corporation (possibly in a different country). 2. Buy from a manufacturer saying they are intended for "security", or "testing", or hell, even arming your own "PMC". 3.Lock and load. How do you think PMCs such as Xe (Blackwater), AirScan, Aegis DS, etc.. get their new "HSLD" weaponry? Most international arms trafficking treaties do not extend to selling firearms to private entities in the same way they do governments.
Respectfully, the (somewhat intoxicated)-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 02:33, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:I wasn't saying it's the majority source, just the source of the more pricey / modern equipment. These people have supply networks that move ''tons'' of drugs across the border, they're not going to consider moving guns in the other direction a substantial risk; one would imagine their US buyers are probably the same people who buy their drugs, considering they're already going to be smuggling stuff back as payment and keeping their activities secret. Most of the weapons they get from the US aren't purchased legally (the big myth is they're bought legitimately from normal gun stores, SO WE MUST CLAMP DOWN ON THIS). Most of their stuff is indeed bought in from other sources, but weapons like the Barretts aren't going to be coming from just anywhere, and there ''is'' precedent from this happening in Northern Ireland where the IRA got a lot of their best weapons from Irish expatriates in America.

:As for Kaffarov, the main problem with the mythical top-end arms dealer is who he's supposed to sell these rare weapons on to, not how he'd get them himself. Sure, if it's ''just'' equipment for his private troops he might splash out, but he wouldn't be wholesaling in exotic arms with rare ammo and parts because nobody would buy them, plus he'd have problems with the companies he's buying from wondering why their weapons are suddenly turning up in conflict zones in the exact quantity they're selling them to his shell company. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::I know who! He's obviously selling to the Russian Army, Brazilian and African militants, and Makarov's terrorists in MW2 and MW3! [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:32, 23 November 2011 (CST)

: From what I remember in the BF3 novel Kaffarov was a former GRU agent handling weapons and training with then political ally Iran, who got too deep in the local agendas and was probably compromised. IN the novel his weapons were less new (Uzis and shit), but I could totally buy that Kaffarov was still connected enough to Russia's arms trade that he could probably weasel crates of AEK971s out of them without too much trouble. Supposedly that's how Solomon got the suitcase nukes in the first place anyway, off Kaffarov. (as a note the book's plot is little more coherent than the game, probably worth the pickup if you're trying to dissect the game's narrative.)--[[User:Toadie|Toadie]] 04:17, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:This entire discussion is clearly a case of thinking way harder about what Kaffarov is hypothetically capable of procuring for his men than DICE did while they were working on the game. As for the whole "Mexico Gun Smuggling Debate" - try reading some academic reports on the subject before claiming that the statistics were cooked up ([http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Chapter%206-%20U.S.%20Firearms%20Trafficking%20to%20Mexico,%20New%20Data%20and%20Insights%20Illuminate%20Key%20Trends%20and%20Challenges.pdf Wilson Centre: U.S Firearms Trafficking to Mexico] is a long read, but it does illuminate the various ways guns are smuggled and how they are interdicted) --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 16:41, 23 November 2011 (CST)

well look at the Libyan civil war were both sides were able to get massive amounts of G-36s --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 20:38, 23 November 2011 (CST)

Most of the weapons such as Barretts, M16s, etc.. are coming from the Mexican military. As for the IRA in the 80s I know all about that, that was a different time. Many things happened back then that could not happen now. Plus the IRA stopped getting guns from the US when they realized it was easier to get them from places like Palestine and etc..
With Libya... well HK is in deep right now for selling to some state police in Mexico that they shouldn't be selling to, it wouldn't surprise me if they sold to Libya and other places.
And Markit, the report you linked to actually states in a couple places that the reports are skewed by many factors.
This can state the facts better than I can: http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/90PercentMyth.pdf
-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 00:57, 24 November 2011 (CST)
:There was also an incident during the Georgia-Russia war where Georgian SF were seen with G36s that they previously weren't known to have. HK weapons are turning up in all kinds of strange places. :S [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:28, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:@Ranger01 - There's no verifiable proof that all those high-end weapons are coming solely from Mexican law enforcement - last time I checked, they could get better weapons than the FN PS90s, Romanian WASR clones, MAK-90s, AR-15 clones with the post-ban features, SKS rifles with Tapco furniture etc. that have been turning up in seizures of cartel arsenals. I know that the 90% statistic was erroneous, but I also do not believe that the percentage is only 12% according to your report (extrapolating only from serial numbers is faulty in itself when criminals usually take measures to remove/modify them). Besides, the "most deadliest weapons come from Central America" does not equal "most of the weapons come from Central America", which seems to be the tack that your article is taking. Also erroneous is the claim that Mexican military personnel are defecting and taking "American-made" weapons with them - the "150,000" figure was for desertions (which take place for any number of reasons in a conscription-based system) and most soldiers are armed with Mexican-produced versions of H&K weapons.

::On an additional note, the G36s that were seen in Libya were likely a gray market sale - a firm buys the weapons with the end user certificate for one country, ships them there, then transfers them to the actual destination. A more controversial story would be that FN directly sold several hundred FN 2000s, FN 303s and P90s to Libya in 2009-2010. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 18:32, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::Politics aside, F2000s would be ''great'' for a desert country; they're almost airtight. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:22, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::Well Saudi Arabia did adopt the F2000 as their standard rifle. -- Long Fallen 21:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Hmm, didn't know that. As probably most of us are, I haven't had hands on on most of these, but am well read on them, and the F2000 would be one of my first choices of assault rifle if I had a country/army :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:51, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::::Now it's just a matter or wondering if they'll ever get around to using them... Sad is the day when hundreds of beautiful F2000s sit untouched in Arabian armories, gathering up dust. It's enough to bring a tear to any IMFDB user's eye xD -- Long Fallen 02:43, 27 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::Researchers point to '''Heckler & Koch G3A3''' being replaced with '''Steyr AUG''' in Saudi Arabian Army[http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_standard_infantry_rifle_for_saudi_arabian_army][http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110305182603AA3EBn4] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:13, 27 November 2011 (CST)

::::::::So the SA National Guard bought the 55,000 F2000s... but the AUG was on issue? Did it replace the AUG? The standard rifle is the G3A3 as of now? A lot of this information feels so outdated. -- Long Fallen 16:19, 27 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::::Saudi Arabian National Guard is separate from Saudi Arabian Army. An analogy would be 'Waffen-SS' (SANG) and 'Wehrmacht' (SAA)[http://www.dnipogo.org/fcs/comments/c424.htm] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:08, 28 November 2011 (CST)

== Blackburn from BHD ?? ==

Go see the Colt M4 section and the M4 series below it is said that Black burn holds M4 quite often. I would like to ask is this Blackburn any how related to Todd Blackburn from Black Hawk Down, the Ranger who fell from the Black Hawk chopper? - [[S9771773G]] 09:47, 20 November 2011 (GMT)

:I imagine it's just a coincidence, Blackburn is a "heroic" surname like Carver or Slater or whatever. I'd have thought if they were referencing Black Hawk Down they'd have named him after someone like Shughart or Gordon, really. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Doubt it. 'Battlefield 3' is unrelated to 'Black Hawk Down', plus, Todd Blackburn is Army Ranger while Henry Blackburn is Marine Recon. Proper analogy would be Patterson's from 'Medal of Honor' series. Both are in Army and [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/Jim_Patterson one] is actually the grandson of [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/James_Steven_Patterson another]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:19, 20 November 2011 (CST)
:'''P.S.''' Although, this would explain the appearance of Little Birds...

::There's also the fact that Todd Blackburn is a real person while Henry Blackburn is a fictional one. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:14, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::True, there is even a page on [http://www.aweekendofheroes.com/vips/todd-blackburn.php Todd Blackburn]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:27, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::::From the link posted by Masterius: "In reality, it is not known why Blackburn lost his grip on the rope and is generally assumed that his inexperience led to his fall ('''However, Master Sergeant Matt Eversmann states that around the time when Blackburn fell, the UH60 canted slightly, and had to put his hand down to stay upright'''. The ranger that roped in after Blackburn also swears that he had grabbed the rope.) Additionally, the film incorrectly portrays Blackburn as a new arrival to Somalia, when in reality he had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company."
::::Um... why would Matt Eversmann have any trouble staying upright in said canting helicopter ''when he was in a Humvee on the ground''? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::[http://inquirer.philly.com/packages/somalia/nov16/default16.asp Because he was, in fact, in a Blackhawk?] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 15:00, 25 November 2011 (CST)
:::::'''P.S.''' ^ Oh, the age there is said to be 18, and "just months out of a Florida high school", instead of 20, and "had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company". So which of the descriptions is the correct one?

::::::They'd said on the DVD commentary as well as in the History Channel documentary about the raid that Eversmann was with the convoy the whole time. Guess they didn't have their facts straight. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::He was the leader of Chalk Four as shown in the film and was inserted by Black Hawk, callsign Super 67. He didn't go to the crash site as shown in the film though, instead he was part of "The Lost Convoy" carrying the captured prisoners, think that is what you are thinking of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:36, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::An interesting thing I found about Todd Blackburn was that he was born on October 25, the same date that BF3 was released, maybe that date was selected on purpose by DICE? [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 19:34, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Now this is intriguing... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:01, 3 December 2011 (CST)

I can tell you without any doubts that BF3 has several [[Generation Kill]] references. For example:

- The main protagonist is part of the 1st Reconnaissance Battalion.

- When driving towards Tehran in the humvees and complaining that they signed up for an ambush, the driver says "Frankly gentleman, I'm not hearing the aggression I'd like. Keep scanning". Which is a reference to the 5th episode "A Burning Dog" when the team leaders are preparing to clear out an ambush by a bridge.

- When Henry Blackburn and Co. drives in a convoy to capture Kaffarov the arms dealers. Matkovic, the guy wearing MultiCam OCP and the AT4, was sleeping on the convoy and when woken up he says "thirty four minutes... I've been asleep for thirty four minutes drinking a vanilla milkshake." Also a reference from the 5th episode A Burning Dog, when Ray Person wakes Brad Colbert to a team leader meeting, Brad responds "fifty six minutes. I've been asleep for fifty six minutes".

[[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:00, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Not to mention the character named Chaffin. There's more, I'll have to play it again to find them all.-protoAuthor 23:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)

== M203 Dog tag ==

I was watching my new unlocked dog tags on Battlelog, and saw that the 40mm GL proficiency Dog tag has an M203 in the background.
Should it be added to the list of weapons appearing in the game?

http://battlelog-cdn.battlefield.com/public/profile/bf3/stats/dogtags/lb/dtb094.png?v=1628729

[[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Yes it should, like the SAA. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:29, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Yeah, though I would prefer these as full screenshots if possible (ie someone unlocking / viewing them), I never like pages full of different aspect ratios and weird tiny images. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Well since we're mentioning weapons appearing on dog tags but not the actual game for usage, the USAS-12 proficiency dog tag has a SPAS-12 silhouette for some reason. It was probably directly ported from Bad Company 2 given how it looks. -- Long Fallen 17:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::Quite a number are, the SCAR-H is a SCAR-L. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::It actually peeves me that many of the assault rifle proficiency dog tags use the icons for the Bad Company 2 models, like most of the assault rifles equipped with grenade launchers. Especially the F2000 one, which isn't even possible to have an underslung grenade launcher, let alone the EGLM pictured on it. :P -- Long Fallen 21:05, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:::You'd be wrong about the F2000 not being able to take a grenade launcher.

:::[[Image:Fn f2000 3.jpg‎|thumb|none|500px|FN F2000 - 5.56x45mm NATO with [[FN EGLM|FN GL1]] - 40mm]]

:::[[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:38, 24 November 2011 (CST)

::::Ah, sorry, I should've made it clear that while the dog tag shows off the EGLM, you can't mount any kind of grenade launcher to the F2000 itself to use. -- Long Fallen 00:42, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::You mean ''in the game''. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:05, 26 November 2011 (CST)

== Going Rambo ==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMcM7OpC2dI&hd=1

Just how realistic is it? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:02, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:I think they should implement an overheating system for all the light machineguns. Just like in Battlefield 2. [[User:Santos|Santos]] 06:33, 30 November 2011 (CST)

::Barrel changes would be more interesting, I think. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:32, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:::And then there will be people complaining that Battlefield is becoming simulator. Rather odd, since magazine system and overheating system were part of the core Battlefield games since the beginning... Sigh, Bad Company... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:52, 1 December 2011 (CST)

== Back to Karkand ==

There's an expansion pack coming out in December, and it's going to have ten new guns and four new vehicles.

Here's a list of the weapons that I can absolutely confirm from seeing in the kill-feed in the trailers:

MG36 with a top rail instead of the carrying handle/optics

L85A2

QBZ-95B

QBU-88

FAMAS (Looks to be the Felin version)

There also looks to be some sort of Kalashnikov style weapon, but it's not shown clearly enough for me to recognize.

Here are the trailers if you feel like playing Where's Waldo:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=TyN_Zjw4l-s Overall Trailer]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjTmieRMKjo Karkand Trailer]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emGXp-qRrVg Oman Trailer]

Also of note, I have the PC version and just about all the weapons unlocked. I might upload screenshots if I get the chance.
--[[User:AchingScaphoid|AchingScaphoid]] 08:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:Unless they've got the screenshot feature working now, you'll need FRAPS to get screenshots. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:20, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:There are 2 AK variants in the first trailer you posted, I think the first is an [[AKM]], second is the same [[AKS-74U]] with the incorrect milled receiver as seen in the main game. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:37, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:The L85 is in the first trailer, although very briefly. 0.37, there's an L85. Old plastic handguard, RIS instead of the 19mm rail. No idea on the optic, other than it not being a SUSAT. --[[User:Spanner|Spanner]]

::I think it might be an Elcan of some sort but not sure. The newest modification to the L85A2 replaces the old rail with a MIL-STD-1913 rail and is fitted with an Elcan Spectre with a piggybacked CCO. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:08, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:::I've also seen real L85s with ACOGs, so using that could be authentic for optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:13, 29 November 2011 (CST)

::::An ACOG on a MIL-STD-1913 would be incorrect though. British ACOGs have a proprietary mount for the original 19mm rail. Any gun that is fitted with the new rail will be using the ELCAN. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Indeed:
:::::[http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/files/BEMIL069/upload/2008/02/2_acog.jpg L85A2 with ACOG on mount]
:::::[http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee252/TarnishUK/SpecterOS4x.jpg L85A2 with Specter on rail]
:::::--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:41, 1 December 2011 (CST)

I added them to the page, feel free to expand them. This picture was on the Blog a few weeks back, it shows all 10 weapons:

http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg

[[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:List of all weapons and attachments in BtK expansion:

:http://mp1st.com/2011/11/30/the-complete-list-of-bf3-back-to-karkand-weapons-and-attachments-revealed/

:--[[User:Wikinerd|Wikinerd]] 09:04, 30 November 2011 (CST)

::Really, the best they could manage was photos of someone's TV? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:I'm not too sure what to think of the Pancor Jackhammer being in this game, I mean, we've already got the USAS-12 as the automatic shotgun, if they wanted to add in another one, they could've just added in the AA-12. Anyone kinda with me on this? - Long Fallen 14:20, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::Not a fan of automatic shotguns anyway, since they, technically, overshadow the semi-automatic ones (because of selective fire). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)

:::The USAS-12 has competition with the Jackhammer, I haven't unlocked it yet but I remember picking up a kit with the Jackhammer and it was like using a slightly lower capacity DAO-12 with it's 6+1 rounds but with automatic fire rate. This video shows some gameplay, extended mags give it 13+1 magazine capacity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q95ICdl9fsE&feature=related It's apparently "slower than the USAS" from what little experience I've had with it and from people I've asked about it [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)

== MG36 ==
I know that there were only 100 or so MG36s made, but isn't a standard G36 with a bipod foregrip and a double drum mag exactly the same thing? I get that if there's one in a movie it will actually be a G36 with bipod and drum added, but in a game can't it be called an MG36 since it didn't start as something else? Also, it IS an MG, not an AR, unless the RPK, M27, and QBB-95 are ARs too. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:An MG36 has a bipod handguard, C-mag, ''and'' a heavy barrel and reinforced action. This, like basically every other MG36 that has appeared in anything, is based on a standard G36 with a bipod and drum, as the Bundrswehr use. I don't think there's even a specific name for the configuration, but it is ''not'' called MG36. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)
::Oh okay, but would the heavy barrel look any different externally? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:11, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:::I believe it's mostly internal. However, IIRC the MG36 was rejected the same year the MIL-STD-1913 standard was drawn up, so an "MG36" with a flat-top rail would have to be a G36 or an after the fact modification of an MG36, and speculating a gun that isn't real ''must'' be modified is trying a little too hard to cover up a simple naming error. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 20:15, 30 November 2011 (CST)
::::Oh okay, well, if it had the standard carry handle I'd say it should be "MG36", but seeing as it has the "C" one, it's a G36 with a bipod, C-Mag, and G36C rail. To be fair though, MG36 is a ''lot'' easier for the sake of the game. On DICE's part I mean. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:10, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Alex - According to G3Kurz on HKpro, the barrel OD is 30% thicker. http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk-long-gun-talk/94949-wtk-mg36-barrel-question.html Evil Tim - Where did you hear that it had reinforced action? --[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 22:44, 30 November 2011 (CST)

== "Kaffarov" ==

So, is this mission always buggy as hell, or did I just have a bad run screencapping it? As well as that weirdness with the Barrett I had guns inheriting the texture of the floor they were on top of (I have a lovely image of a linoleum QJY-88), some pictures of MP7s with their magazine against their front grip and their stock hovering in front of them at ninety degrees to the gun and every single USAS-12 in the level appearing on the ground with no magazine. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:That always seems to happen with USASs and MP7s, but please, please add the linoleum QJY-88 to the main page, just for laughs :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)

::Also, I really didn't get the last level. Why would you hijack a train that was already going to where you want to go (thus drawing attention to yourself for no good reason), then randomly rig it to explode even though you've already got a nuke on board? And why was one man with a detonator standing in the same room as the explosives that detonator set off? And how did Blackburn know that trigger would set off the random bombs and not the nuke? I have questions, dammit. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:54, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:::You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:::This is my explanation and I know there's several holes in it but bear with me, it makes slightly more sense than just a lack of general explanation. The hijacking of the train was probably a distraction whereby once they got off their intended stop with the nuke, they would send it hurtling somewhere else for the police and other emergency services to follow. This would have then given them an opportunity to get the nuke to Times Square undetected while the emergency services scrambled to stop the train wired with explosives. In terms of the detonator, the guy was probably the patsy to serve as a suicide bomber-type to ensure the distraction seemed like the real deal and to lay blame once again on the PLR rather than Solomon. Blackburn knew that the trigger wouldn't set off the nuke because nukes require specialised arming devices if I'm not mistaken and you can't use a normal detonator to blow it up. Just my explanation of the events. Feel free to lay waste to my over-active imagination that came up with this somewhat cockamamie fill-in to explain the plotholes in the last mission. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:25, 7 December 2011 (CST)
::::The thing is the train was already ''going'' to Times Square, and detonating a nuke underground would create a sinkhole a large chunk of lower Manhattan would fall into; if anything it would be even worse than detonating it on the surface. Solomon could have just sat there alone with the thing in his lap on a timer or dead man's switch, the only purpose the hijacking ultimately served was to draw attention to the fact that something was up.

::::Then again, this story also had my very favourite, the framing device of the protagonist describing the action. I always smile when I imagine how it's going during the actual level. "So then I ducked into cover. Looked up but didn't shoot. Reloaded. Aimed down my sights. Saw a guy ducking out so I fire twice and reloaded and then..." "Weren't we supposed to be on a time limit?" "One Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Seventh Amendment." "Ah, yes, the right to defence in the form of an average-length modern video game." [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:47, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Correct, the train was going to Times Square but perhaps it was not the last station? I'm not sure how the trains work in New York because I don't personally live there but it's possible that Times Square was a station on a longer line of stations where Solomon could have sent the police, ESU, FBI, Homeland Security and whatever government agencies to follow the train rigged with explosives. Creating a sinkhole does seem like a better idea but I think the purpose of blowing it in Times Square itself above ground was to send a message. The mushroom cloud that would be better seen from above ground would strike more fear, in my opinion but hey, that's just my two cents.

:::::In terms of the framing device, I have to agree with the utter ridiculousness of the idea of Blackburn describing the action he performed when recalling every single detail from the playable level but it's far more plausible than Black Ops. Thinking of how Mason could describe every single detail of his action movie experience as well as the experience of the SR-71 Blackbird pilot just made my brain stop completely. Especially when he was extremely doped up and possibly tortured judging by the bloodstains on various parts of his clothing. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:59, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::::::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca4D0-s8OsI&feature=related Believe me, an underground nuclear detonation is hard to mistake for anything else]. As for Blops, I always had the image of the guys questioning him picking up the bottle of truth serum and checking the expiry date when he started with the G11s and WA2000s. Or the whole THE NUMBERS thing just ending up with him forgetting his wife's birthday. "No! Reznov said it was tommorrow!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:11, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::Holy wow. I know that's destructive and it's horrible to say this but that is indeed impressive. My sentiments exactly. However, they probably just went meh because they (as in the interrogators who were CIA) were probably using LSD as a truth serum as well as a mind control drug at the time. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 05:46, 7 December 2011 (CST)

== Question ==

I just got this game (yay! I absolutely love it, even the singleplayer) and I was gonna get screenshots but I heard I need FRAPS. What is FRAPS and how do I get it? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:34, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:It is a program that can record gameplays and you can also take screenshots with a hotkey if it is running in the background. It has a freeware version. I think in the free version it can only save images in BMP, but u can convert them easily. Get if from here: www.fraps.com. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 00:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)

::The free version watermarks videos, not sure if it does the same with screenshots. You're best off saving in BMP since the JPEG captures are pretty abysmal quality with lots of artifacting. Give me a few days first, though, I have fifteen hundred images of the singleplayer I need to sort through. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:29, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:::I just need screenshots and I have Photoshop CS4. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)

::::Then yeah, http://www.fraps.com/ to download the free version. Wikipedia says it doesn't watermark screenshots even on the free version, just be sure you have plenty of HD space since a 1920x1080 BMP weighs 3-6 megabytes. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:05, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::596 GB. :B - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:49, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::: I currently use FRAPS myself. It does not watermark screenshots. Haven't tried getting videos yet. Anyways, the race is on to see who can put up pictures first.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 14:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)

I will be uploading a lot of great screenshots for the page tomorrow, should I add pics of the iron sights or just ones of interest? (ie, misaligned sights, the M9's correct sights, the MEU's tritium sights, etc.) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:45, 8 December 2011 (CST)

:Actually, I'm in favour of having ironsight pictures on all video game pages, since they're so often missaligned, or out of scale, as a lot of what we do here is point out flaws and educate (hopefully) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:06, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::Yay, more work. I need more weight to this. :| - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 02:22, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::Iron sights are fine as long as they're reasonably interesting and the article doesn't have too many weapons; this one should be ok. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:30, 8 December 2011 (CST)

== My God ==

I am so glad with battlefield 3 and mainly dice the are actually listening to the community and something even better they are fixing incorrect guns.

Ex:

Tweaked the AN94 so its burst fire better conveys the real world advantage offered by this weapon.

Added Single Shot to the AN94 as an available fire mode.

Slightly increased the recoil on the M416 and removed the Burst Fire mode (this weapon incorrectly had burst fire, which was not authentic).

from latest patch --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 19:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:Cool! =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:Oh! But HK416 is still called M416? :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:13, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::Wait, really? they removed burst from the 416 and added semi to the 94? Wow, cool! Those were the only fire mode errors too :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:02, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::Well, aside from not being able to fire the spotting rifle on the SMAW. I still think it would be amusing to be able to shoot people with your 9mm tracer that shoots like a rocket. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::What? Oh, looked it up: "Each round consists of a special 9mm tracer bullet, crimped into a 7.62x51mm NATO casing with a .22 Hornet blank cartridge for propellant". That is the most WTF round I've ever heard of :O [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 13:41, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Alex, I don't suppose you could share the link with anyone reading this page? :) -- Long Fallen 14:17, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::::Oh right :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder-launched_Multipurpose_Assault_Weapon [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:58, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::I found a more detailed look at the round here: http://cartridgecollectors.org/cmo/cmo05oct.htm [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 16:49, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::::::I wonder if they're going to fix the "SVD" as well [[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:01, 4 December 2011 (CST)

:Is that just for PC? 'Cause I'm on the PS3 and the HK416 still has a burst mode and the AN-94 still doesn't have semi-auto as a fire mode. Or is this for the campaign? I haven't played the campaign again in a while. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:28, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::With the new patch that came out for the upcoming DLC, Back to Karkand. The AN-94 got the single-shot fire-mode and the HK416 got the burst-fire mode removed. Confirmed on the PC [[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::On the PS3 here, AN-94 still has the automatic/burst selection as before; no semiautomatic fire. The HK416 also still has semi/burst/fire selection. - Long Fallen 23:18, 9 December 2011 (CST)

:::Xbox still has the old AN 94 and M416 fire modes. Also if you use the AN 94 with iron sights and swap back and forth between your pistol, the front sight disappears on the Xbox. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:30, 20 December 2011 (CST)

::::That change is in the next patch we're supposed to get, it takes longer for consoles. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:54, 20 December 2011 (CST)

Any idea of when that is? I just started using the AN 94 and love the two round burst but I'm hindered at long range because of the recoil and rate of fire.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:05, 26 December 2011 (CST)

:No idea, it has to go through certification from MS/Sony and usually takes 2-3 weeks. Ish. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:51, 26 December 2011 (CST)

== Changing Descriptions in screenshots. ==

If you take the screenshot, go ahead and put whatever you want in there. But if you're going to edit my words, do so only if there is a typo, misspell, incorrect information or bad grammar. Seriously, if you want to put your own words so badly, put your own damn screenshots up.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 00:58, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:Your screenshot descriptions read like a filing cabinet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:40, 5 December 2011 (CST)
Then like I said previously, put up your own damn screenshots--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 13:20, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:This is a wiki. The point of a wiki is collaborative editing. As stated in the [[Rules,_Standards_and_Principles#IMFDB_is_an_information_resource.2C_not_our_private_playground | Rules, Standards and Principles]], ''"IMFDB is an information resource, not our private playground."'' --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 13:48, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:And besides, if you take a look at the bottom of the edit window, you'll see it reads: '''If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.''' So... yeah. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:If you're going to get this precious about your screenshots, then don't bother uploading them at all. While IMFDB does have a certain unwritten concept of "uploader's privilege" it does not extend to captions that sound like they were sent in Morse code and don't match the way the other captions already on the page are written and formatted. Also, lose the attitude or you'll be getting some time out. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:50, 5 December 2011 (CST)
::Unless the map or game mode is important to the image, which it usually is not, it should be left out. As for the rest of your captions, I have no problem with what you put, just the map/gamemode doesn't belong here. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:38, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:Fine fine. I didn't know you were an admin so don't ban me just to prove you can. Sorry if I sounded a little terse, but it is annoying having your words re-written constantly. But just one last thing, cause I noticed you mass changed my changes back to what you had, would you mind changing "the player character" to the class? Such as "The US/Russian Engineer in Multiplayer holds the A-91"? (i'll put that screenshot up in a bit)--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:10, 5 December 2011 (CST)
::I mainly do that because the character has no name in multi, it's much easier in single where you can do "Blackburn holds an X." "An engineer holds an X" seems a little awkward in terms of sentence structure; it feels oddly unspecific about the character holding the weapon being the one the player is controlling. I mainly make a deal of saying "the player character holds..." because it annoys me when people say "the player holds..." since the player is either holding a control pad or a mouse. Typically if the player is holding a gun something has gone very badly wrong somewhere along the line. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:28, 6 December 2011 (CST)

::[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] is admin since October 2011, so keep that in mind. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:07, 6 December 2011 (CST)

:::I didn't know that, congrats! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:17, 6 December 2011 (CST)

::I just think that it sounds better than just saying "the player character" because it is just extremely generic. That's why I usually just put "weapon with extra extra extra attatched" without putting player character, cause it's obvious there is a player character holding the weapon. And you don't want people to be holding guns in real life? Tsk Tsk. What kinda firearm wiki admin are you? And relating to that, is there a list of site Admins available? Is it in the forum? Cause I know there's at least 5 of you guys floating around here (plus Bunni, but I have never actually seen him post or discuss something in the main wiki) and it'd be nice to know who they are. --[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 10:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::[[Imfdb :. guns in movies :. movie guns :. the internet movie firearms database:Administrators|There you go]]. Overly long page title BTW. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:29, 7 December 2011 (CST)

As long as you don't edit my post about the PP2000 doing as much damage and throwing pebbles at someones face, that's my gem right there. :p (not like there's anything I can do about if it does get edited) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 13:24, 10 December 2011 (CST)

:I won't change it. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 10 December 2011 (CST)

== Knife used by Dmitri ==

Does anyone know what kind of knife was used by Dmitri in the mission "Comrades"? Its the one he uses to cut the wires in the garage to unlock the gates. It looks ... funky and not very utilitarian--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:06, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:It's a Spetsnaz machete. [http://www.sovietarmystuff.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1160] --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 21:25, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:A more in-depth look here: http://interestingswords.com/machete/russian-machete-taiga.html [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 17:10, 8 December 2011 (CST)

== Furthering the US Army / USMC mix theory ==

IRL USMC use neither [[M26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System|M26 MASS]] nor [[Heckler & Koch M320|M320 GLM]]. Army does. USMC still use [[M203 grenade launcher|M203 GL]] as UGL. As for hand-held grenade launcher... [[Milkor MGL#MGL 140|M32 MGL]]. Spammy for MP but would have worked for SP (like [[Barrett M82#Barrett M107|M107 LRSR]] did). Thoughts shared. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:40, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:Well yeah, and they also don't use the M1A2 Abrams. This seems to be in some nebulous future where the USMC has upgraded all their equipment. Also the M107 was actually pretty stupid since all you did with it was shoot some guys on the other side of a courtyard with a non-magnifying scope. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:44, 9 December 2011 (CST)

::Gotta say, upgrading equipment in the future one 'A' more doesn't seem as excessive as with entirely new one... But yeah, it's still upgrade. Like, say, giving the future US Army the USMC [[Beretta 92 pistol series#Beretta M9A1|M9A1]].
::Heh, that's the wrong mission they put M107 in. Is there any USMC mission where the long range capabilities of M107 would have served better? (Here I'm starting to think of those sniper missions in '''CoD 4''' and '''MoH''') --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:12, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:::I think the best mission to have the M107 in would have been "Rock and a Hard Place," there's a lot of range in that valley. Perhaps even let you pick off officers directing things at the rear so fewer vehicles would show up. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:38, 9 December 2011 (CST)
::::In Operation Swordbreaker I sorta hoped you'd get a chance for some M107 urban action from a sniper point, taking out PLR Insurgents from afar. I'd thought big anti-material plus big city with lots of cover, be a perfect role for an Anti-Material sniper, alas it was used against you rather than use from you. Instead you just got a Mk. 11. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 11:14, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:::::Yeah, I was sad the M107 wasn't put to better use, it's the only time it appears in the ENTIRE game. The only I thing I didn't like in the SP. :( - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 16:31, 9 December 2011 (CST)

http://www.battlefield.com/images/bf3-hooah :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:02, 13 December 2011 (CST)

== Just some silliness ==

I didn't feel like uploading tons of screens for the page today so I'll put these up just for fun.
[[Image:BF3-Falcon Kick!.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Falcon Kick!''']]
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Damn, those alien bastards are gonna pay for shooting up my ride.''']]
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''I'm gonna kick your ass, bitch!''']]
- [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:00, 10 December 2011 (CST)

:Would be cool if the kick could actually have been used as a combat move like in '''F.E.A.R.''' or '''Mirror's Edge''' (also made by EA DICE) :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:42, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:More pictures with included silliness are always welcome to me :D If we could make pictures with captions as hilarious as the ones on the Far Cry 2 page, I would always come to the BF3 page whenever I'm in a bad mood xD -- Long Fallen 22:11, 11 December 2011 (CST)

::Yeah, the Far Cry 2 page is the best page ever created! :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:46, 12 December 2011 (CST)

::Wait, how do you kick? [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:37, 11 December 2011 (CST)

::You can't kick, this animation only happens when your character vaults over a low lying object, like a guardrail or a rock. -- Long Fallen 22:44, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:::Dammit. I am disappoint. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:46, 11 December 2011 (CST)

== Current Page Status / More Images ==

It's amazed me how long the game's been out yet there's still not very many images of all the weapons :/

I've unlocked all the multiplayer weapons, but unfortunately don't have a capture card for my PS3, which I think is moot since most of the current images look like they were taken on the PC's level of detail.

As of right now I love the current format the MP7's listing is in, showing off the accessories it can mount at one time, while also showing off each part of the reload animation. It would also be nice if each listing had the weapon's simple ironsights as the first image, or vice versa.

Either way, we need to make this image complete :D A game like this doesn't deserve to have such a barren imfdb page... -- Long Fallen 22:40, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:It's because the game's too fun to take the time to do it ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:43, 12 December 2011 (CST)

== HK53 ==

Is it only on the 360 version where the HK53 is, for some reason, referred to as the G53? And for some reason it comes standard with a 12x ballistic scope. It's quite amusing, the scope is as long as the gun. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 03:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:It's called G53 on PC as well. [[User:Ramell|Ramell]]
::I think the 12x is a bugged accessory, that's usually only available on those weapons for DICE Employees [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:01, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:::HK53 on PS3, hence that screenshot. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)
::::I had assumed that DICE didn't get the rights to use "HK" because in the description for all other HK guns they are referred to as "made by a German weapons manufacturer". Strange that PS3 uses the "HK".--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 12:44, 18 December 2011 (CST)
:12x Ballistic Scope? Can you take a screenshot and post it here? :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::lol sorry, I don't know the first thing about taking screenshots. I'm sure someone else here could get a screenshot. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::All the BTK guns have the DICE-only attachments unlocked by default, that is to say, all the ones you're never supposed to get. If you want screen shots I'd get them in the next month or less as they'll probly get rid of them in the next patch. 12x Scope: FAMAS, L85A2, HK53, QBZ-95B, QBB-95, MG36. Flash Suppressor: QBU-88, L96. Suppressor: Jackhammer. Note that for the Jackhammer the suppressor doesn't appear on the model in first or third person, the stats don't change, and I'm pretty sure the sound doesn't either, so really, it doesn't exist. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 10:04, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:::DICE-only? Cheating Campers >:O
:::HK53 and QBZ-95B with ballistic scope - would be funny to see :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 17 December 2011 (CST)

== "Realistic" ==

Does it annoy the hell out of anyone else when people talk about how "realistic" BF3 is, specifically compared to MW3? Yes, DICE did a much better job on the modeling and it does have a more realistic ballistics engine, but come on. Every soldier carries around an infinitely reusable parachute? People run around with defibrillators to instantly revive teammates? Somehow the Support class fits an infinite amount of ammo for every caliber in his pocket? Then, of course, every single soldier is trained to use every jet, helicopter and tank, and the jets can be used as taxis with wing mounted seating. Don't get me wrong, these are all things that add to the enjoyment of the game, and they work really well as game mechanics, but not even remotely realistic. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 06:22, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:They call it realistic because using the word "verisimilitude" makes people think you're trying to look clever for the sake of it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:27, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:Yeah, some aspects of the game are unrealistic, but think about it though. Would you really want to play a game where you run out of ammo ever 5 minutes and have to run around and just wait to die or hope you knife someone to take his weapons, and then hope he too hasn't run out of ammo? Or would you want to have to go through a Gran Turismo-esque license course to be able to use every vehicle properly? While some things are clearly over-the-top, I won't argue with that, some things are obviously put in for the gameplay value, for enjoyment. IF the developers truly wanted a realistic game, they'd have the disc eject and destroy itself after you die. Though the defibrillator comment reminded me of something my friend said, "Oh, you come back to life after getting hit directly with a tank shell! Oh here, let me revive this oatmeal!" [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:49, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:Googling "Battlefield 3 is too realistic" and getting matching results is kinda funny. For some interesting comparisons: [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FacklerScaleOfFPSRealism Fackler Scale of FPS Realism] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:28, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::As an airsofter I find it that list really funny. Classic: All FPSs / Realistic: Airsoft :D Seriously though, what I look for when I think realism is things that work how they do in real life, how they have to work, not whether they normally are or should be used in that way. BF3 is rare in that it has the following: Tac and normal reloads all done right, one in the chamber, iron sights and optics lined up/used properly, all fire modes that should be on any weapon present, switching modes does not change the gun's stats (ie switching to semi makes gun more powerful) just the mode, damage (which can never be considered fully realistic) at a reasonable level and based on the calibre, bullet travel time and drop. Now, whether the Marines have the right weapons, vehicles, or camo, and stuff like that comes second to me, because even if they don't use a certain camo, they ''could'' as opposed to one in the chamber, which '''has''' to funtion like that. Russian soldiers don't use, say SG 553s, QJY-88s, or Jackhammers, but they could, and more importantly I can, because first and foremost in mulitplayer I'm me. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 09:58, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:::Well, things like single reload animation, no +1 round in the chamber, fixed firing mode, hitscan, etc. are usually the result of engine limitations. In this regard we can see that [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite-2 Frostbite 2 Engine] is more advanced than [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite Frostbite 1 Engine] (which already had bullet physics; although magcount and overheating from [http://www.moddb.com/engines/refractor-2 Refractor 2 Engine] are absent; it would have also been nice if there were interchangeable magazines). Regarding the equipment it shows how much there [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DidNotDoTheResearch didn't do the research] and [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShownTheirWork shown their work]. Me wants [[Project Reality]] for BF3 :| --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:02, 17 December 2011 (CST)

:I'm not saying that it isn't realistic in some specific areas, sure it is, but it's a video game, and to compare it to COD and say BF is more realistic is kind of like comparing Star Trek to Star Wars and saying Star Trek is more realistic because they used the word "tachyon". That being said, I think all four examples I just used are very evertaining. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 04:56, 16 December 2011 (CST)

== Javelins are the best. ==

Javelin + CITV station on a tank = fantastic combination. The top down fire mode makes killing LAVs and Amtraks, especially on Noshair (sp?) Canals easy, not to mention the massively amusing ability to fire on laser painted aircraft. It's always hilarious to watch an FA/18 blow up and the guy flying just sees FGM-148 Javelin killed him and he wonders what just happened. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 02:22, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:Oh my, sounds like tracer darting in BC2 o_O --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:56, 18 December 2011 (CST)

::And CITV Station + MBT Guided Shells! Lock, fire, triple kill on one Little Bird! Lock, fire, quad on the other. I was 7/0 20 seconds into the game! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:14, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::It's even better against a jet. I just try to imagine the expression on a pilot's face as he wonders how the hell an Abrams just shot down his Flanker. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)

:The Javelins may be the best, however, setting up the SOFLAM is akin to setting yourself up with giant neon lights pointing "I'M RIGHT HERE!" to the enemies. I'm sure DICE had good intentions when programming it so that it wouldn't be ridiculously common and spammy, but it just sort of defeats the point of giving it to the stealthy ninja that the Recon class should be. Not to mention it gets even less useful on Wake Island with the mobile AA guns shooting the bright red light visible from just about any distance with the fury of a thousand angry Russians armed with PPSh's. :/ -- Long Fallen 22:32, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::Oh, the Tunguska, which has the ability of firing every bullet ever made at the same time?[[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::Haha, is there any other? -- Long Fallen 01:26, 20 December 2011 (CST)

== 9K22 Tunguska ==

I've actually just realized that while the page is mostly (half) complete, the 9K22 Tunguska's armaments haven't been added to the page; because I'd like to know exactly how much ammunition for its guns it carries and approximately for how long would it waste it all before running out, since it's a mobile AA platform? -- Long Fallen 01:36, 20 December 2011 (CST)
:Ammunition capacity is 1,904, combined rate of fire is variable between 3,900 and 5,000 rounds per minute, so if we take the lower rate of fire this works out to about 30 seconds of continuous firing. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:45, 20 December 2011 (CST)

::[[Image:2a38m.jpg|thumb|none|400px|2A38M Autocannon - 30x165mm]]
::Example image in case anyone feels like adding. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:36, 22 December 2011 (CST)

== Added a piece of info about the M1014 ==

It's really inaccurate for even a shotgun. I've patterned my shotgun in real life which also has a cylinder bore and the pattern was half the size of the pattern in game. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:46, 20 December 2011 (CST)

:This "short-range shotgun" problem is sadly common in video games, to the point which the TVTropes website has a page just for it. And Frag-12 rounds for the shotguns in this game are horribly overpowered too. I'd take a tighter pattern with a realistic damage-drop-off with distance with buckshot if they could tone down the Frag-12 rounds. For a more realistic shotgun, try playing SWAT 4. You can actually snipe somewhat well with a Benelli Nova in that game if you crouch and wait to become fully accurate.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 20:55, 21 December 2011 (CST)

:SWAT4... It's the same game that also has handgun sniping and guns that do less damage at point blank range. I was disappointed with the 1911 in that game sadly. :( I'd be careful advising anyone to play that game; its mechanics are ungodly finicky. -- Long Fallen 22:23, 21 December 2011 (CST)

::You could snipe with handguns in Battlefield 2 too... That was actually a tactic employed by experienced BF2 snipers: shoot the enemy with bolt-action sniper rifle and then immediately switch to pistol and finish him off ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:20, 22 December 2011 (CST)

:Meh, SWAT 4 isn't as finicky with its mechanics if you know what you're doing. The damage with its guns is somewhat random to reflect how bullets in real life don't always perform as expected (i.e., JHPs clog with clothing and fail to expand, 5.56mm FMJ fails to fragment once inside a target if the bullet isn't properly constructed or the barrel it's fired from is too short, etc.). though I will admit that the M1911 and other .45 ACP guns are underpowered in that game. But I think the reason as to why "handgun sniping" has persisted up until now is that modelling ballistic physics for bullets en masse was only possible when the right programming and hardware appeared. The BF2 example was probably implemented as well given the limited draw distance of the engine; without an omnipresent zoom system to represent how your eyes can focus on far-off objects (like in ARMA 2) the limitations of pixels on our monitors means that enemies become unrecognizable jumbles of pixels at distances we would still be able to clearly see them in real life. Also, because adjustable sights are hard to model in games (as opposed to scopes with ballistic drop markings), pistols often don't have ballistic drop either. I tried compensating for ballistic drop while shooting pistols in the STALKER series--because the iron sights on pistols can't be adjusted it's very difficult, since essentially the muzzle will obscure your target when you aim high to compensate.

:But the sooner we get realistic shotgun buckshot spreads and ranges in games, the better. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 14:02, 22 December 2011 (CST)

::The problem is, the zoom system only activates when you press a button. So any time you don't, the environment is presented in its distant form. This gives an edge to the person who secured a position and now zooms in in the enemy direction, while the enemy is on the move and can't see said person. In reality, they should see each other evenly. I like this absence of bionic eyes in [[Project Reality]]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:26, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:So you have to hold down the button in ARMA2 to focus on distant objects? Well, a toggle system would be much better (probably combined with using a "dynamic zoom" system that used your mouse wheel or two keys to zoom in and out so you could vary the amount of zoom much like your eyes can focus across a great deal of ranges). Still, given the pixellation problem that I mentioned earlier, all PCs in Project Reality have to carry binoculars so as to focus on distant targets, but these cannot be combined with weaponry, so if you're using a kit that has no optics for your gun and are trying to hit something that you can't really see unmagnified (even though in real life you would be able to see and hit a target at that distance), tough luck. Project Reality is also going in the process of making a version based on the ARMA2 engine as well. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 18:17, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::Adjustable Zoom would be nice. Sadly, developers haven't yet caught the idea. Even adjustable FOV is not in every modern shooter (and where it is, it might be limited).
::It works both ways in PR: you have problems seeing an enemy in the distance and an enemy has problems seeing you ;) And yes, I'm aware of PR for ArmA II. [http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-reality-arma2 It's currently v0.1], right at the starting line. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:47, 24 December 2011 (CST)

== M1014 magazine tube length ==

Can someone explain to me what's going on with the magazine tube length of the M1014 in-game? The weapon art models show the typical length, but in-game, the magazine length looks like a M3. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 13:12, 27 December 2011 (CST)

The pump action shotguns in the game start with four round mag tubes. Therefore the art models depict them as such. However, when you unlock "Extended Magazines", the in world model changes to the six round tube for both the Remington and the Benelli.--[[User:GLOCK10mil|GLOCK10mil]] 16:18, 27 December 2011 (CST)

:Didn't think of that. Thank you. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 17:03, 27 December 2011 (CST)

== UMP trigger group ==

It seems the world model for the H&K UMP has safe, semi-auto, and full auto, even though the in-game weapon operates with a selectable 2-round burst.--[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 14:53, 28 December 2011 (CST)
:If that's true than it is an error, though the UMP ''can'' have a full/2/semi/safe trigger group. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:32, 28 December 2011 (CST)

== Back To Karkand Weapons ==

So I've been playing B2K a lot, and I've gathered a bunch of trivia about some of the guns that could be added to the page, but I'm not so knowledgable about them so I thought I'd leave them here so someone who knows more can add them into the page.

The L85A2 has three round burst as well as auto and semi, which as far as I know it doesn't in real life. It also can't mount the M320 which, again as far as I know, is the grenade launcher it mounts in real life. It's also 'cocked' by pressing a bolt release just above the magwell.

The FAMAS also has burst as well as semi and auto, again I don't know if this is true in real life.

Both the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B and burst as well as automatic and semi, but I'll admit I know nothing about these weapons. The QBZ-95B and the QBU-88 are reloaded similarly to the AN94/AEK-971 (new mag is used to push the mag release and then inserted) and it looks absolutely bizarre in first person because they're bullpup.

Also, the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B are chambered in 5.45x39mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm and the QBU-88 is chambered in 7.62x54mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm.

That's all I've got [[User:Nikonov|Nikonov]] 18:17, 9 January 2012 (CST)

:The FAMAS does have all three, and a lot of the info screens are wrong or somewhat wrong, pretty sure they're just copy-pasting errors as opposed to them not knowing the calibre. Everything else you said is correct as far as I know. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:34, 9 January 2012 (CST)

::Well, if they are copy-pasting errors then someone should tweet Demize about it ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:10, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::The reload animation for those Chinese rifles doesn't use the magazine to push the old mag out. The character pulls out a new mag and pulls the old one out with just his fingers but has the magazine in hand to load into the gun right after. I saw a video of it with an AK once.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:49, 9 January 2012 (CST)

::I'm assuming DICE watched this video, I don't have a clue if this is what they teach in the PLA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMmaIZ8Umnk--[[User:Mattatack92|Mattatack92]] 00:40, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:IRL L85A2 mounts not [http://www.hk-usa.com/-images/products/m320/lg_m320_3.jpg M320] but a different variant of AG36, called [http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v470/Black_Hawk_169/DSC00005.jpg UGL]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:07, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::I just Tweeted Demize about the calibre and ROFs being sometimes wrong for the BTK guns. :) Also, he says he's not going to add the HK79 and GL1 due to memory issues, which is fair. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:16, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:::That would make a nice "GL Pack" DLC though: GL1, HK79, M203, UGL... And more, should the carbines get corresponding rifle variants :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:20, 11 January 2012 (CST)

Also interesting, the QBZ-95's ironsights glitch when you fire. Actually helps. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:23, 10 January 2012 (CST)

I don't have a Twitter, could someone suggest something small on the HUD on hardcore modes that show what fire mode your gun is set to? I change it a lot and the guns with three settings make it difficult.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:43, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:I agree, and Tweeted :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:56, 11 January 2012 (CST)
::Would be kind of cool if in hardcore mode you could actually look down at your weapon and see the fire selector or check how many rounds are in the magazine. If you think having no HUD is "hardcore," just imagine having to actually worry about taking your eyes off the battleground long enough to check on your weapon like that. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:14, 22 January 2012 (CST)

== Pancor Jackhammer ==

Why? Not only is this weapon relatively pointless since they included the USAS-12 (it seems to recoil less and that's about it) but it comes with a freaking suppressor. Of all the useless devices you can equip to a weapon as insanely loud as the Jackhammer theoretically would be, this and an under-barrel can opener would just about top the list. (I presume they put it on there because the revolving magazine system of the Jackhammer has some similarities to that of a Nagant M1895.) Also, why in the hell is the freaking thing even in the game? There's supposedly a grand total of two of the dumb things in existence. If we're going to throw in an automatic shotgun prototype that never made it into production, how about the H&K CAWS? That one was actually tested by the US military. In another world, it could have been adopted. Or, hell, the Atchisson AA-12. Don't get me wrong, the Jackhammer is a cool looking gun, but it never made it off the design bench and I'm a ''little'' tired of seeing it crop up in video games claiming at least some level of real world veracity (the world "realistic" is a silly one to use for FPS games). [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:24, 22 January 2012 (CST)
:It's supposed to be for the nostalgia, I guess, since it was an unlockable in BF2. Much like them keeping that "DAO-12" name for the Protecta, though it's now a Street Sweeper. There were actually quite a few Jackhammer prototypes, but only two that fired fullauto. Or rather didn't, which is why there were only two. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:38, 22 January 2012 (CST)

:They will put XM8 as military tested weapon, methinks. CAWS was pretty cool gun in [[Jagged Alliance 2]] :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:52, 22 January 2012 (CST)

::As stated, it's in because it was in BF2, that's the point of the Back To Karkand pack. Also, it doesn't actually have a suppressor. Well, it does, but it's invisible and does not change any stats whatsoever, not even making you not appear on the minimap. So, there's just a pretend option for a suppressor. Why? Same reason the two ARs, two Carbines, and two MGs have 12x scopes, and the two Sniper Rifles have Flash Suppressors: it was an oversight, those are the attachments you're supposed to ''never'' get those attachments, only DICE gets them, because they're silly. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:10, 22 January 2012 (CST)

Well the suppressor actually does do something, it cuts damage down. I actually like the Pancor though, with frag rounds, ext mags, and a Holo sight I can clear out most hallways on metro. But, that is pretty much the only map it is of any use on.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 16:47, 22 January 2012 (CST)

:::Oh geez, way for me to miss the obvious. I forgot about it being in BF2, having not played the "older" games in quite a while. (Why does 2005 seem so long ago?) Actually, I was a little sad that B2K didn't include the option to hijack semi-trucks and civilian cars like you could with the Armored Fury booster pack. At least you can borrow a Bobcat on Wake Island and try to run enemy soldiers down with it for nothing other than sheer comedy value... And the other "weird" attachments (okay, maybe not the flash suppressor) are at least ''sort of'' useful. You can be extremely annoying with the MG36 fitted with a 12x - no sniper likes dodging nearly-accurate long range machine gun fire, and anything that snipers don't like is fine with me. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 04:26, 4 February 2012 (CST)

== Dog Tag Weapons ==
I vote we add a section either at the bottom of the page for all of them, or at the end of each class of weapons for them, because there are a LOT of guns on dog tags that aren't actually in the game. (SAA, SCAR-L, proper MG36, standard FAMAS, that weird suppressed Makarov PM variant, M203, and lots more) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:25, 26 January 2012 (CST)
:If no one objects to this, I'm going to create a sub-catagory at the bottom of each weapon class (SMG, shotgun, etc) that has all the Dog Tag-only weapons, because this page will get very confusing if we don't, as none of those weapons are in the game, just pictures of them. So far (of the top of my head) Makarov PB, Single Action Army, M1911A1, SPAS-12, SCAR-L, FAMAS (standard), M203, M16A2, M16A1, MG36 (proper). I'm sure there are more, but that's what I can think of right now. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:45, 4 February 2012 (CST)
::I've added everything I know of, but there are probably more. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:46, 8 February 2012 (CST)

== Patch is still yet to reach Xbox it appears ==

It appears as though the Xbox has been forgotten since the AN 94 still just has two fire modes and the HK416 still has it's three fire modes. Does anyone know more about it than me? --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:59, 17 February 2012 (CST)

:Yeah, we never got that patch that the other two platforms did. I'm assuming it'll be rolled into the patch that was originally supposed to come out for all platforms this month, but is now going to be in March at the earliest. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:57, 18 February 2012 (CST)

::Nope, here on the PS3 it's still the same, three-mode HK416 and two-mode AN94. DICE has gone on to say that across all consoles the stats are very different; however, the next patch will put all weapons on equal ground across all platforms. -- Long Fallen 02:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== All Fancy Right Side Dog Tags ==
I'm going to add this to the page soon, to replace the Dog Tag Weapons sections I made before, but right now I need sleep. They're sorted by the name of the real weapon in game, not in game name and not name of weapon in the picture, if those are different. If any of you can figure out what the not-actually-a-QBB-95 is, let me know :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:36, 1 March 2012 (CST)

[[Image:BF3_500KillGuns.jpg|thumb|none|650px]]

:You have no idea how grateful I am to see this in a neat compilation! Been looking everywhere for just these designs to no avail. -- Long Fallen 02:46, 2 March 2012 (CST)
I think the QBB-95 is a totally made up frankengun. However the core of it is actually an Enfield L85, you can tell by the vent holes on the receiver: 3 horizontal vents at the rear, then a slightly larger gap followed by two slightly smaller vents. Also visible is the raised portion on the bottom edge of the upper receiver which runs horizontally under these vent holes, and the pistol grip and trigger guard seem to match. On top it seems to be a grossly oversized M4/M16A4 detachable carry handle, and the front is anyone's guess. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:56, 2 March 2012 (CST)
::Yeah, I think you're right. It also has the generic bipod most guns in BF3 use, Harris Bipod I think it's called. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== Flash Suppresor ==
I know this is really not important and probably no one cares, but I think the flash suppresor may be a Vltor VC-1. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 17:15, 1 March 2012 (CST)
:You found it! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:28, 1 March 2012 (CST)

::Not important? Any info is very welcome on this site! In fact, I was wondering this myself. -- Long Fallen 02:48, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== 3 Expansions planned for BF3 ==

[http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/03/07/battlefield-3-close-quarters-announced.aspx 3 Expansions planned for BF3]

Newest expansion has 10 new guns, what are you guys thinking/hoping they will be? I'm hoping for a USP, perhaps another pump action shotgun,maybe a TAR or a Galil, and an XM8 (wishful thinking on that last one, but they put the Jackhammer in, so why not?) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 18:20, 7 March 2012 (CST)

EDIT: Can someone fix that link please? I'm not very good at this clearly.

Me being the AR fanboy that I am, I just want a short barreled AR (10 inches prefferably). cheech98 9:28, 7 March 2012

:HK416. I'd like to see another pump shotty and some pistols at the least. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:49, 7 March 2012 (CST)

::Already spoken for; the M416 is the 10" 416.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 18:16, 8 March 2012 (CST)

Definitely a pump shotgun, maybe an Ithica or a Mossberg with wood furniture (because with black furniture it would look too much like the 870). I would like to see an AK in 7.62x39. I was honestly appalled that BF3 didn't feature a .30 cal AK. An MP5, a Hi-Power, a CZ-75 and a SIG-Sauer would also be nice; a non-tacticool FAL, maybe an FNC (always loved that gun), a Skorpion (come on, who doesn't wanna shoot that thing in a video game), the VZ-58, the HK P7 perhaps? The HK33 would be an awesome weapon to see (although admittedly not too plausible), an Uzi (full size or mini, doesn't really matter to me), a Makarov (still common among the Russian Armed Forces, right?), the P99, and MORE REVOLVERS, DAMMIT. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 02:04, 8 March 2012 (CST)
:Yeah, I think if they added the FAL, it wouldn't be tacticool, seeing as how the G3A3 wasn't. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 1:32, 11 March 2012 (PST)

:Rumours are circulating that two such weapons in Close Quarters Pack are the CZ-75 Automatic is one such pistol as a competition towards the G18 and 93R and a new sniper rifle, the CZ-750 for the Recon. Also two new vehicles rumored are the UH-60 Blackhawk and M2A2 Bradley IFV. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 10:07, 9 March 2012 (CST)

::But isn't the CQ Pack gonna take place entirely indoors? I'm pretty sure it said somewhere that the four maps in the next pack are going to feture entirely infantry-based, indoors combat. I guess I could see a helicopter working in there somewhere (thinking of the Airport map's chopper-gunners on MW2, I suppose) but it seems like vehicles would break the tense, room-to-room air they're going for here. [[User:Sopher|Sopher]] 3:56, 13 March 2012 (EST)

The HK33 is actually in the game already, in the Back to Karkand expansion pack as the 'G53' or something like that. *EDIT* Nevermind, you meant the full size rifle, my mistake...
--[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 12:28, 8 March 2012 (CST)

It's gonna be a bunch of CQB guns, no doubt. I'd like to see (Assault Rifles) Tavor TAR-21 and the Masada. (Carbines) AKMs and the AUG A3. (Machine Guns) LSAT and the IMI Negev (Snipers) VSS Vintorez and the DSR-1 (Submachine Guns)MP5 PDW and the Colt R0991 9mm. --[[User:Commander Lukas|Commander Lukas]] 16:28, 8 March 2012 (CST)

There's gonna be AT least 30 weapons or more tops in each of the three packs over a period of this year, I think we are going to have our hands full identifying all them because it ain't just firearms either, they're adding a slew of vehicles with each pack as is the norm with this supposed DLC's. "Close quarters" I think is mostly gonna be all transport vehicles so I suspect, possibly Technicals, Civilian Vehicles, maybe an aerial transport helicopter/plane or light attack scout helicopters, possibly light IFV's too. Weapons are likely to be CQB in nature, I'm hoping for alot of Sub-Machine Gun's and Shotguns, the game needs more Pump Shotguns in my opinion. My general wish-list includes:

* SA58 OSW Battle Rifle and Type 95 Assault Rifle (to round out the Chinese Firepower in BF3, almost the full collection now) for the Assault Kit
* Zastava M92 (Compact AK47 Variant) and the Mark 18 Mod 0 (Ultra compact AR) and possibly the QLZ-87 Automatic Grenade Launcher (as an Anti-Vehicle Weapon, replaces the Rocket Launcher) for the Engineer
* MG3 GPMG and L86A2 (Equivalent to BF3's RPK and M27, gotta have more weapons like those for the Support Kit)
* Mark 12 SPR (American equivalent of the SKS in BF3) and CZ-750 for the Recon
* CZ-75 Auto, H&K MP5, Mossberg 590 Pump Shotgun (if it was a secondary for the Assault I'd be in love with it), TOZ-194, Valtro PM-5, Sawn Off Double Barrel, Benelli M3 Super 90, Smith & Wesson 686, SIG P226, H&K USP, QSZ-92 and FN Five SeveN are just some examples of all kit weapons I'd love to see.

[[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 10:56, 9 March 2012 (CST)
:If they added the QLZ-87, it would be '''''WAY''''' overpowered. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 7:28, 12 March 2012 (PST)

:Dunno about the QLZ-87, man. I'd think most Battlefield players are already sick of overpowered, hand-held weapons that can auto-fire frags. [[User:Sopher|Sopher]] 4:03, 13 March 2012 (EST)

"There's gonna be AT least 30 weapons or more tops in each of the three packs over a period of this year"<br/>
Thirty weapons in each pack? Are you kidding me? BtK had eight weapons. And how do you know all the packs will have weapons in?[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 12:37, 9 March 2012 (CST)
:Actually, BtK had ten weapons, and he meant at least 30 overall, he just stated it wrong. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 3:28, 9 March 2012 (PST)

They just released a new trailer that shows off some of the weapons in the first expansion pack, I only saw two but there may be more hidden throughout, the ones I saw were the L86A1 and the ACR(I assume it was the ACR, it was however called "ACW-R", I'm seeing a trend with Magpul weapons here with the PDR being renamed the PDW-R. (PS. sorry if I screwed up the formatting, this is my first entry.)
After further searching the complete list seems to be AUG, SPAS-12, ACW-R(ACR), L86A1 LSW, LSAT, MTAR-21, SCAR-L. However some people claim to have spotted the CZ-75 Auto. [[User:Spry|Spry]] 12:38, 13 March 2012 (CET)

:Good catch Spry, I watched the trailer twice carefully and found the same. I'll make it a list so it's easier to see. As with Karkand we should avoid adding anything new to the main page until we have more to add. I'm assuming the same weapon layout as Karkand until I hear something solid about that full auto CZ-75, maybe it has a stock and is a PDW? I'm also assuming what go to what classes, can't really go wrong there. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 11:47, 13 March 2012 (CDT)

*Assault: ACW-R (ACR)
*Assault: AUG (variant unknown)
*Engineer: MTAR-21
*Engineer: SCARL-L (misspelling, tweeted Demize)
*Support: L86A1
*Support: LSAT
*Recon: ???
*Recon: ???
*All Kit: ??? (SMG)
*All Kit: SPAS-12

::I'm excited to see the AUG and the MTAR, but the ACR and SCAR-L... while I have nothing against them (in fact, I really like them) aren't they a bit... implausible? As for the LSAT... FUCK. NO. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 19:15, 13 March 2012 (CDT)

Talk:Main Page

2012-03-12T00:16:12Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* New category: "Containing Unidentified Firearm"? */

User:ManchurianCandidate

2012-03-10T19:39:48Z

ManchurianCandidate: Created page with "This is a generic user page. Pretty generic, huh?"

This is a generic user page. Pretty generic, huh?

Talk:Battlefield 3

2012-03-08T08:05:50Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* 3 Expansions planned for BF3 */

See [[Talk:Battlefield 3/Archive 1]] for older discussions.

__TOC__

== Why am I not surprised? ==

Part of me isn't too surprised that the CODMW3 article would be taken off the Work in Progress Status in a much shorter time than BF3's page. Personally I think MW3 committed a war crime with how atrocious the M16A4 looks both in the first person and 3rd person models of it. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:00, 16 November 2011

:Just the M16? :/ Hell, the P99 is the only pistol where they didn't get something wrong. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:14, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:It has more to do with the fact that MW3 makes more mistakes and therefore is far more fun to write about. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:18, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::My personal favourite screw up in MW3 has to be the Skorpion's scope rail mount, with the "MG36" as a close runner up. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 03:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::I still mad about the fact they suddenly decided that it'll better that the M4A1 will have a 20-round magazine rather than a 30-round magazine -_- --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 03:05, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:::Lol good points all around. I'm not too knowledgeable on everything but I'm in the service and I use the M16A4 often. So it stuck out like a sore thumb the moment I picked up the rifle in the game that something was really freaking off about it. Like it wasn't already bad having 30 rounds come out of a 20 round mag. But bolt on rails to A2 Handguards? Really?! XDDD I don't know how accurate that P99 is, but it irks the hell out of me seeing it held one handed in the First Person Model. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:25 16 November 2011

Ya know? It's funny that the "fact" they are using military advisers to make the game better in "tactics" and stuff (yeah, right), this military advisers or what ever, aren't aware of the way the developers model the weapons and doesn't 100% reassemble to the real life one's :/ I guess the developers tell them "We don't really give a damn about realism, just tell us how the hell modern warfare works"... Still, the guys of BF3 made a bit better, though it does have also many things unrealistic, like the fact Marines are using M16A3's instead of M16A4's, and some of them running with an M240 like it a was wooden gun. Sigh. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 02:57, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:The thing about an advisor is that his job is to answer questions. It's up to the developers if they a) ask him the right questions and b) pay attention to his answers. I believe ''Star Trek's'' science advisors have publically complained that they're only asked for advice on what terminology to use and never on whether something is actually good science. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:15, 16 November 2011 (CST)

One thing SP Campaign of BF3 proves is that BF3 shouldn't have SP Campaign in the first place. One would expect it to be more authentic, yet it takes approach of CoD: "We just put randomly weapons we have in MP whether or not they fit in". So suddenly we have Marines with M16A3s and M240Bs (instead of M16A4s and M240Gs), insurgents (exactly insurgents and not organized militia from pre-alpha trailers) with AK-74Ms and AEK-971s (instead of AK-47s / AKMs), Spetsnaz member Vladimir with 5.56 A-91 (despite Russian forces simply not using this caliber even for SF), etc. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:27, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:Let's not forget that the protagonist of the game, Blackburn, during the interrogations scenes, you can see his name and branch tags that they're in white and straight rather than MARPAT and in an angle with the chest pockets. Also, one of the the guys in Blackburn's team, though I can't remember his exact name (the guy who carries M136 all the time), wears MultiCam OCP, still, rather than MARPAT uniform. Eventually, war games wouldn't be realistic as real life, even in the small parts. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 11:22, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Except my games (If I ever make games). :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 11:34, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Plus, they (Marines) get CAS from Little Birds. Apparently, to the game devs the terms 'US Army' and 'USMC' are interchangeable. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:50, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:I don't recall the insurgents using AEK-971s in the Iran missions, usually it was a random stew of your typical AKS-74u, AK-74M (don't real militants from the former Soviet bloc use the more modern 5.45 AK-74 at times?), RPKs, and the KH2002. However, the terrorists with Solomon from later on in the story do use all this, and even more somewhat outlandish equipment. Also, since the page is incomplete, can you explain to me how you identify the Marine's M16 models as the A3 versions? During the campaign I recall Blackburn's M16 as being able to fire in fully automatic. (Except that one mission where you inexplicably jump off with an HK416) Also, didn't Vladimir use the AS VAL throughout the Spetsnaz missions? And although it's not top-notch realistic Ala ''The Hurt Locker'', I wouldn't exactly outright call it the CoD approach. I mean, just look at what they did with Black Ops. Pointing out every inaccuracy in that game is to the point of turning it into a drinking game. Long Fallen 17:49, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Other than that one HK416 Blackburn had, which was odd, if they worst things the Marines had were M16A3s instead of A4s and M240Bs instead of M240Gs, then I'm happy enough. And the PLR only had 74Ms, 74Us, and RPKs if I remember correctly, the later enemies had AEKs. All the weird guns were given to Kaffarov's private army, as he is an arms dealer. It's like complaining you see a few M1928s instead of M1A1s in a WWII movie. Black Ops.. is Black Ops, and MW3 had FADs in the hands of African militia... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:20, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Maybe it is related to the "AKS-74U vs. UMP issue": in some of the videos of "Operation Swordbreaker", inside of the building, leading to anti-sniper position, one of the insurgents is certainly equipped with AEK-971, with others having AKS-74U and AK-74M (AK-74 would be correct for former Soviet bloc militant but not AK-74M unless he managed to scavenge it from Russian soldier). For M16A3, check one of the Marines on the way to bridge in the same mission. And while Kiril used the AS "Val", Vladimir used the 5.56 A-91. And yes, as Alex said, Black Ops... is Black Ops *sadface* --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:17, 17 November 2011 (CST)

:::You are right, that one insurgent always has an AEK, but that's an exception. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:31, 17 November 2011 (CST)

Cod always screws up the guns
:What does that have to do with Battlefield 3? [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:12, 22 January 2012 (CST)

== Sidearms ==

Has anyone else noticed Campo carries ''two'' sidearms, one on his chest and one by his hip? Looks like two Glocks.

[[Image:BF3-Glock-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Ten more and he'll be a Glockenspiel.]]

[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:18, 18 November 2011 (CST)

:I'm sorry, but that caption was just too good. On topic however, it seems as if the handgun holstered on his chest seems pretty low res to be made out. Could it be a designer oversight or something? - Long Fallen 17:21, 18 November 2011 (CST)

::Maybe they are copying Epps from [[Transformers: Dark of the Moon]], he nonsensically carries a pair of Glocks in the same way as well... --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 18 November 2011 (CST)

::Well, that's the Assault kit's chest, with the Glock and all, so they most likely gave him a leg holster and forgot about that one. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:01, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:::It's like in MW2 where the snipers carry unusable M1911. Although it is peculiar that the Marine in this game carries unusable Glock and not M9 or MEU(SOC). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:17, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== BTK Weapons ==

Finally! http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg

:MG36 and Jackhammer? Guess the XM8 and plasma rifle will be in the next DLC. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:30, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:I guess that confirms that there will be no PLA Faction DLC *sadface* I still hope for EU Faction :|
:Also confirmed that HK53 is back intact :)
:--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Why do they choose to include the "HK" prefix in the HK53, but not on the M416? [[User:Santos|Santos]] 11:26, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:::I'll ask Demize why this HK is okay (and the HK21 in BF2). Actually, they hinted they might do more weapon DLCs later, so I'm expecting a "Back To Bad Company" pack with all three XM8s and other stuff. Also, not a plasma rifle, but I've always thought it'd be cool to see Halo guns in another game, the human ones. For those of you that don't know, they all make functional sense. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:48, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::::lol yeah all those functional Spartan Lasers we have lying around. Though it would be cool to see an NTW-20 in a videogame. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:45, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:::::[http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle Have] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle1 you] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle2 said] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle3 NTW-20]? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:34, 12 December 2011 (CST)

== RPK ==

Incidentally, I need to check if the RPK-74 has a flash hider. If not, with wood furniture and a ribbed metal magazine, it's actually an RPK with a sight rail, not a -74 at all. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:10, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Maybe I didn't spend enough time using it, but I remember it having black furniture. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:44, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Checking my PS3 video captures it's very dark brown; more to the point, though, it's got that standard AK-style handguard with two holes through the middle (with a RIS foregrip sticking out the bottom, admittedly); the -M polymer handguard is a different shape and has ridges all along the top of the gas tube.

::[[Image:Soviet RPK-74.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK-74 light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]
::[[Image:rpk74m.jpg|thumb|none|601px|RPK-74M light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]
::[[File:BF3-RPK-1.jpg|thumb|none|601px|]]

::If it doesn't have a flash hider, I think that makes it an RPK. I thought I could see one there, but in my PS3 video it looks like it doesn't have one and the in-world and pickup models don't have one either. I was going to say "except the scope mount" but MPM's RPK image has one:

::[[Image:RPK lmg.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK Light Machine Gun with 40 round magazine - 7.62x39mm]]

::Is this normal? From what I'd read the scope bracket was an -M thing. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:35, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::Thanks for clearing up the RPK differences, as for the scope rail, scopes are nice to have sometimes, I'm sure some of the older RPKs were fitted with scope mounts as aftermarket parts in real life. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:06, 20 November 2011 (CST)
::::As the RPK in the game only has the bracket fitted when a sight is there, I would certainly put it in the "aftermarket" category. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:37, 20 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Oh right, just like the AKS-74U becomes an AKS-74UN when mounted with optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:47, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Just to assure you this ''does'' happen (it's so nice having a PS3 video of half the game to pull shots from):

:[[Image:BF3-RPKForegrip.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

:RPK with inexplicable foregrip. I'd just forgotten they don't all have that. Also, is it just me or is the scope mounting screwed to the side of the dust cover rather than attached to a bracket? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)

== Single Action Army ==

Just letting you guys know, as stated on its page it is called Single Action Army on this site as there are so many nearly identical replicas calling it the more correct Colt 1873 might actually be wrong, and SAA is used as a catch-all term. However, just as we assume a full-size Glock is a 17 unless we can tell otherwise, we also assume a gun in a game is not a clone, unless we can tell otherwise. Therefore, it is assumed that the drawing of the SAA is the original Colt 1873, and should be named as such. This is just to avoid an edit war, or something. :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== M224 ==

I don't know about Xbox, but on the PS3 the M224 definitely has an M7 baseplate in multiplayer. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 15:54, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Yup, it has one on 360. Lol at the baseplate having a designation :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:19, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Feel free to change it, I was going off it not having one in single. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:31, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== Kaffarov's Private Army ==

While I understand that Kaffarov is an arms dealer, it boggles my mind how so many times in fiction there are people who are able to procure such military spec equipment like the F2000, Mk.17 (SCAR-H), AEK-971, and so many others. Surely the companies and or countries that produce them don't freely sell them to whatever buyers there are? My question is how would people like Kaffarov even be able to avoid the system and acquire such equipment? I don't know if it has been answered elsewhere, or for obvious reasons '''hasn't''', but it's just something that I haven't been able to explain logically. -- Long Fallen 18:03, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Reminds me of [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Legionnaire Legionnaire] from [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Battlefield:_Bad_Company Battlefield: Bad Company]. And that guy paid his mercenaries in ''gold bars'', mind you. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Kaffarov... Makarov... Kaffarov... Makarov... Is it only me or does BF3 is trying to copy MW3 in many matters? :/ --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 23:29, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Um, what's so suspicious about Russian (or Russified) surname ending in -ev or -ov? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::I'm not sure either, but it lets us have the cool guns people don't really use, so it gets a pass in my books. Also, those two names aren't really that similar, and the characters are nothing alike. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:12, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:To answer the question, no. Any customer who could afford top-drawer equipment would be dealing directly with the company that made it, the kinds of people who go to dodgy arms dealers want weapons that are simple enough to equip illiterate militiamen with, cheap enough to equip a ''lot'' of them with, and have widely available spare parts and ammunition. It's no longer the era when unpaid former Soviet commanders would empty entire arms depots onto the black market and flee to countries that don't have extradition treaties with Russia, and no longer the era when you could get a superpower to pony up a whole bunch of equipment and training just by saying you were fighting for / against communism. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:46, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::I see, but I recall this story from a few years back -[http://www.expatica.com/be/news/local_news/factory-tightens-security-after-gun-thefts-23226.html Stolen Five-seveNs from FNH factories] (I had no idea the P90 was a handgun xD) - And then there's this too -[http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20081112_worrying_signs_border_raids Mexican drug cartels being armed with P90s and Five-seveNs] So I still want to know, what are the likely chances of seeing terrorists with such equipment? I mean, these articles seem to bring it to light. (Sorry if I'm going off topic) -- Long Fallen 00:42, 21 November 2011 (CST)

:::With Mexico it's a situation where a lot of the top-class armament is purchased in the United States and smuggled across the border; similar arrangements were used to smuggle arms to the IRA during The Troubles in Northern Ireland. That's the "buying directly from the supplier" kind of deal, and is usually done without a dealer acting as an intermediary (because the Cartels have enough money to do it themselves, or take the weapons in part payment for supplying product to drug dealers). Your typical Eastern Bloc / African arms dealer just buys up weapons somewhere a war is ending and ships them to where a war is still going on, because the buyers don't have the contacts, legitimacy or resources to do it by themselves. A lot of the guns these guys circulate have been involved in local conflicts for years or even decades.

:::Top-end hardware typically comes from governments and organisations. Insurgents in Iraq didn't get top-of-the-line anti-tank weapons and training in making IEDs from some guy in the business of moving weapons, they got them from sympathisers in places like Iran. Alarmism about what ''kind'' of weapons terrorists have is pretty foolish anyway, since generally they prefer the instant, indiscriminate destruction of explosives to trying to shoot people with a gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::::Ah, I see, thanks for enlightening me :) -- Long Fallen 20:25, 21 November 2011 (CST)

Whoever said "a lot of the top-class armament...blah blah Mexico... smuggled from US..." is rather wrong. The Mexican cartels who have P90s and M16s and etc western weaponry are getting it from the Mexican military and police, only a small percentage of the guns near the US border are actually smuggled in to Mexico from the US. The numbers seem higher because recently Mexico has been sending in stores of arms they have confiscated over the past X amount of years (that they know can be most likely traced to the US) to get traced at the same time. This leads to a overblown number that looks good on anti-firearms pamphlets. If you think about it a bit, what do you think would be easier and cheaper:

1. Finding and paying someone to buy 10 semi-automatic guns in the US at ridiculous prices, risking him getting caught, losing your money, going through all the background checks, etc, then sneaking them over the border. Not to mention finding ammo.

Or

2a. Paying some guerrillas in some SA country x amount of dope to bring in a ship, container, truck, or plane full of 100s or 1000s of eastern bloc or former US military weaponry, that is most likely going to be fully automatic. Plus large quantities of ammo for said weaponry.

2b. Stealing or buying from a corrupt military/ police official brand new weaponry.

The "X% of guns in Mexico are from the US" myth is a fallacy created by the Mexican and US govts and heavily compounded by the ATF smuggling them themselves or letting them walk, and the FBI for not laying out the specifics of the stats. Then the subsequent (ratings improving) media hype compounds it further.

Not saying it doesn't happen, just that it is greatly exaggerated.

Now as for how someone like Kaffarov would get the weaponry, its pretty simple. 1. Start a (possibly dummy) corporation (possibly in a different country). 2. Buy from a manufacturer saying they are intended for "security", or "testing", or hell, even arming your own "PMC". 3.Lock and load. How do you think PMCs such as Xe (Blackwater), AirScan, Aegis DS, etc.. get their new "HSLD" weaponry? Most international arms trafficking treaties do not extend to selling firearms to private entities in the same way they do governments.
Respectfully, the (somewhat intoxicated)-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 02:33, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:I wasn't saying it's the majority source, just the source of the more pricey / modern equipment. These people have supply networks that move ''tons'' of drugs across the border, they're not going to consider moving guns in the other direction a substantial risk; one would imagine their US buyers are probably the same people who buy their drugs, considering they're already going to be smuggling stuff back as payment and keeping their activities secret. Most of the weapons they get from the US aren't purchased legally (the big myth is they're bought legitimately from normal gun stores, SO WE MUST CLAMP DOWN ON THIS). Most of their stuff is indeed bought in from other sources, but weapons like the Barretts aren't going to be coming from just anywhere, and there ''is'' precedent from this happening in Northern Ireland where the IRA got a lot of their best weapons from Irish expatriates in America.

:As for Kaffarov, the main problem with the mythical top-end arms dealer is who he's supposed to sell these rare weapons on to, not how he'd get them himself. Sure, if it's ''just'' equipment for his private troops he might splash out, but he wouldn't be wholesaling in exotic arms with rare ammo and parts because nobody would buy them, plus he'd have problems with the companies he's buying from wondering why their weapons are suddenly turning up in conflict zones in the exact quantity they're selling them to his shell company. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::I know who! He's obviously selling to the Russian Army, Brazilian and African militants, and Makarov's terrorists in MW2 and MW3! [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:32, 23 November 2011 (CST)

: From what I remember in the BF3 novel Kaffarov was a former GRU agent handling weapons and training with then political ally Iran, who got too deep in the local agendas and was probably compromised. IN the novel his weapons were less new (Uzis and shit), but I could totally buy that Kaffarov was still connected enough to Russia's arms trade that he could probably weasel crates of AEK971s out of them without too much trouble. Supposedly that's how Solomon got the suitcase nukes in the first place anyway, off Kaffarov. (as a note the book's plot is little more coherent than the game, probably worth the pickup if you're trying to dissect the game's narrative.)--[[User:Toadie|Toadie]] 04:17, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:This entire discussion is clearly a case of thinking way harder about what Kaffarov is hypothetically capable of procuring for his men than DICE did while they were working on the game. As for the whole "Mexico Gun Smuggling Debate" - try reading some academic reports on the subject before claiming that the statistics were cooked up ([http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Chapter%206-%20U.S.%20Firearms%20Trafficking%20to%20Mexico,%20New%20Data%20and%20Insights%20Illuminate%20Key%20Trends%20and%20Challenges.pdf Wilson Centre: U.S Firearms Trafficking to Mexico] is a long read, but it does illuminate the various ways guns are smuggled and how they are interdicted) --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 16:41, 23 November 2011 (CST)

well look at the Libyan civil war were both sides were able to get massive amounts of G-36s --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 20:38, 23 November 2011 (CST)

Most of the weapons such as Barretts, M16s, etc.. are coming from the Mexican military. As for the IRA in the 80s I know all about that, that was a different time. Many things happened back then that could not happen now. Plus the IRA stopped getting guns from the US when they realized it was easier to get them from places like Palestine and etc..
With Libya... well HK is in deep right now for selling to some state police in Mexico that they shouldn't be selling to, it wouldn't surprise me if they sold to Libya and other places.
And Markit, the report you linked to actually states in a couple places that the reports are skewed by many factors.
This can state the facts better than I can: http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/90PercentMyth.pdf
-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 00:57, 24 November 2011 (CST)
:There was also an incident during the Georgia-Russia war where Georgian SF were seen with G36s that they previously weren't known to have. HK weapons are turning up in all kinds of strange places. :S [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:28, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:@Ranger01 - There's no verifiable proof that all those high-end weapons are coming solely from Mexican law enforcement - last time I checked, they could get better weapons than the FN PS90s, Romanian WASR clones, MAK-90s, AR-15 clones with the post-ban features, SKS rifles with Tapco furniture etc. that have been turning up in seizures of cartel arsenals. I know that the 90% statistic was erroneous, but I also do not believe that the percentage is only 12% according to your report (extrapolating only from serial numbers is faulty in itself when criminals usually take measures to remove/modify them). Besides, the "most deadliest weapons come from Central America" does not equal "most of the weapons come from Central America", which seems to be the tack that your article is taking. Also erroneous is the claim that Mexican military personnel are defecting and taking "American-made" weapons with them - the "150,000" figure was for desertions (which take place for any number of reasons in a conscription-based system) and most soldiers are armed with Mexican-produced versions of H&K weapons.

::On an additional note, the G36s that were seen in Libya were likely a gray market sale - a firm buys the weapons with the end user certificate for one country, ships them there, then transfers them to the actual destination. A more controversial story would be that FN directly sold several hundred FN 2000s, FN 303s and P90s to Libya in 2009-2010. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 18:32, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::Politics aside, F2000s would be ''great'' for a desert country; they're almost airtight. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:22, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::Well Saudi Arabia did adopt the F2000 as their standard rifle. -- Long Fallen 21:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Hmm, didn't know that. As probably most of us are, I haven't had hands on on most of these, but am well read on them, and the F2000 would be one of my first choices of assault rifle if I had a country/army :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:51, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::::Now it's just a matter or wondering if they'll ever get around to using them... Sad is the day when hundreds of beautiful F2000s sit untouched in Arabian armories, gathering up dust. It's enough to bring a tear to any IMFDB user's eye xD -- Long Fallen 02:43, 27 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::Researchers point to '''Heckler & Koch G3A3''' being replaced with '''Steyr AUG''' in Saudi Arabian Army[http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_standard_infantry_rifle_for_saudi_arabian_army][http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110305182603AA3EBn4] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:13, 27 November 2011 (CST)

::::::::So the SA National Guard bought the 55,000 F2000s... but the AUG was on issue? Did it replace the AUG? The standard rifle is the G3A3 as of now? A lot of this information feels so outdated. -- Long Fallen 16:19, 27 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::::Saudi Arabian National Guard is separate from Saudi Arabian Army. An analogy would be 'Waffen-SS' (SANG) and 'Wehrmacht' (SAA)[http://www.dnipogo.org/fcs/comments/c424.htm] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:08, 28 November 2011 (CST)

== Blackburn from BHD ?? ==

Go see the Colt M4 section and the M4 series below it is said that Black burn holds M4 quite often. I would like to ask is this Blackburn any how related to Todd Blackburn from Black Hawk Down, the Ranger who fell from the Black Hawk chopper? - [[S9771773G]] 09:47, 20 November 2011 (GMT)

:I imagine it's just a coincidence, Blackburn is a "heroic" surname like Carver or Slater or whatever. I'd have thought if they were referencing Black Hawk Down they'd have named him after someone like Shughart or Gordon, really. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Doubt it. 'Battlefield 3' is unrelated to 'Black Hawk Down', plus, Todd Blackburn is Army Ranger while Henry Blackburn is Marine Recon. Proper analogy would be Patterson's from 'Medal of Honor' series. Both are in Army and [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/Jim_Patterson one] is actually the grandson of [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/James_Steven_Patterson another]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:19, 20 November 2011 (CST)
:'''P.S.''' Although, this would explain the appearance of Little Birds...

::There's also the fact that Todd Blackburn is a real person while Henry Blackburn is a fictional one. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:14, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::True, there is even a page on [http://www.aweekendofheroes.com/vips/todd-blackburn.php Todd Blackburn]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:27, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::::From the link posted by Masterius: "In reality, it is not known why Blackburn lost his grip on the rope and is generally assumed that his inexperience led to his fall ('''However, Master Sergeant Matt Eversmann states that around the time when Blackburn fell, the UH60 canted slightly, and had to put his hand down to stay upright'''. The ranger that roped in after Blackburn also swears that he had grabbed the rope.) Additionally, the film incorrectly portrays Blackburn as a new arrival to Somalia, when in reality he had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company."
::::Um... why would Matt Eversmann have any trouble staying upright in said canting helicopter ''when he was in a Humvee on the ground''? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::[http://inquirer.philly.com/packages/somalia/nov16/default16.asp Because he was, in fact, in a Blackhawk?] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 15:00, 25 November 2011 (CST)
:::::'''P.S.''' ^ Oh, the age there is said to be 18, and "just months out of a Florida high school", instead of 20, and "had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company". So which of the descriptions is the correct one?

::::::They'd said on the DVD commentary as well as in the History Channel documentary about the raid that Eversmann was with the convoy the whole time. Guess they didn't have their facts straight. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::He was the leader of Chalk Four as shown in the film and was inserted by Black Hawk, callsign Super 67. He didn't go to the crash site as shown in the film though, instead he was part of "The Lost Convoy" carrying the captured prisoners, think that is what you are thinking of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:36, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::An interesting thing I found about Todd Blackburn was that he was born on October 25, the same date that BF3 was released, maybe that date was selected on purpose by DICE? [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 19:34, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Now this is intriguing... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:01, 3 December 2011 (CST)

I can tell you without any doubts that BF3 has several [[Generation Kill]] references. For example:

- The main protagonist is part of the 1st Reconnaissance Battalion.

- When driving towards Tehran in the humvees and complaining that they signed up for an ambush, the driver says "Frankly gentleman, I'm not hearing the aggression I'd like. Keep scanning". Which is a reference to the 5th episode "A Burning Dog" when the team leaders are preparing to clear out an ambush by a bridge.

- When Henry Blackburn and Co. drives in a convoy to capture Kaffarov the arms dealers. Matkovic, the guy wearing MultiCam OCP and the AT4, was sleeping on the convoy and when woken up he says "thirty four minutes... I've been asleep for thirty four minutes drinking a vanilla milkshake." Also a reference from the 5th episode A Burning Dog, when Ray Person wakes Brad Colbert to a team leader meeting, Brad responds "fifty six minutes. I've been asleep for fifty six minutes".

[[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:00, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Not to mention the character named Chaffin. There's more, I'll have to play it again to find them all.-protoAuthor 23:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)

== M203 Dog tag ==

I was watching my new unlocked dog tags on Battlelog, and saw that the 40mm GL proficiency Dog tag has an M203 in the background.
Should it be added to the list of weapons appearing in the game?

http://battlelog-cdn.battlefield.com/public/profile/bf3/stats/dogtags/lb/dtb094.png?v=1628729

[[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Yes it should, like the SAA. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:29, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Yeah, though I would prefer these as full screenshots if possible (ie someone unlocking / viewing them), I never like pages full of different aspect ratios and weird tiny images. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Well since we're mentioning weapons appearing on dog tags but not the actual game for usage, the USAS-12 proficiency dog tag has a SPAS-12 silhouette for some reason. It was probably directly ported from Bad Company 2 given how it looks. -- Long Fallen 17:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::Quite a number are, the SCAR-H is a SCAR-L. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::It actually peeves me that many of the assault rifle proficiency dog tags use the icons for the Bad Company 2 models, like most of the assault rifles equipped with grenade launchers. Especially the F2000 one, which isn't even possible to have an underslung grenade launcher, let alone the EGLM pictured on it. :P -- Long Fallen 21:05, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:::You'd be wrong about the F2000 not being able to take a grenade launcher.

:::[[Image:Fn f2000 3.jpg‎|thumb|none|500px|FN F2000 - 5.56x45mm NATO with [[FN EGLM|FN GL1]] - 40mm]]

:::[[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:38, 24 November 2011 (CST)

::::Ah, sorry, I should've made it clear that while the dog tag shows off the EGLM, you can't mount any kind of grenade launcher to the F2000 itself to use. -- Long Fallen 00:42, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::You mean ''in the game''. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:05, 26 November 2011 (CST)

== Going Rambo ==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMcM7OpC2dI&hd=1

Just how realistic is it? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:02, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:I think they should implement an overheating system for all the light machineguns. Just like in Battlefield 2. [[User:Santos|Santos]] 06:33, 30 November 2011 (CST)

::Barrel changes would be more interesting, I think. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:32, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:::And then there will be people complaining that Battlefield is becoming simulator. Rather odd, since magazine system and overheating system were part of the core Battlefield games since the beginning... Sigh, Bad Company... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:52, 1 December 2011 (CST)

== Back to Karkand ==

There's an expansion pack coming out in December, and it's going to have ten new guns and four new vehicles.

Here's a list of the weapons that I can absolutely confirm from seeing in the kill-feed in the trailers:

MG36 with a top rail instead of the carrying handle/optics

L85A2

QBZ-95B

QBU-88

FAMAS (Looks to be the Felin version)

There also looks to be some sort of Kalashnikov style weapon, but it's not shown clearly enough for me to recognize.

Here are the trailers if you feel like playing Where's Waldo:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=TyN_Zjw4l-s Overall Trailer]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjTmieRMKjo Karkand Trailer]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emGXp-qRrVg Oman Trailer]

Also of note, I have the PC version and just about all the weapons unlocked. I might upload screenshots if I get the chance.
--[[User:AchingScaphoid|AchingScaphoid]] 08:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:Unless they've got the screenshot feature working now, you'll need FRAPS to get screenshots. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:20, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:There are 2 AK variants in the first trailer you posted, I think the first is an [[AKM]], second is the same [[AKS-74U]] with the incorrect milled receiver as seen in the main game. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:37, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:The L85 is in the first trailer, although very briefly. 0.37, there's an L85. Old plastic handguard, RIS instead of the 19mm rail. No idea on the optic, other than it not being a SUSAT. --[[User:Spanner|Spanner]]

::I think it might be an Elcan of some sort but not sure. The newest modification to the L85A2 replaces the old rail with a MIL-STD-1913 rail and is fitted with an Elcan Spectre with a piggybacked CCO. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:08, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:::I've also seen real L85s with ACOGs, so using that could be authentic for optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:13, 29 November 2011 (CST)

::::An ACOG on a MIL-STD-1913 would be incorrect though. British ACOGs have a proprietary mount for the original 19mm rail. Any gun that is fitted with the new rail will be using the ELCAN. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Indeed:
:::::[http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/files/BEMIL069/upload/2008/02/2_acog.jpg L85A2 with ACOG on mount]
:::::[http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee252/TarnishUK/SpecterOS4x.jpg L85A2 with Specter on rail]
:::::--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:41, 1 December 2011 (CST)

I added them to the page, feel free to expand them. This picture was on the Blog a few weeks back, it shows all 10 weapons:

http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg

[[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:List of all weapons and attachments in BtK expansion:

:http://mp1st.com/2011/11/30/the-complete-list-of-bf3-back-to-karkand-weapons-and-attachments-revealed/

:--[[User:Wikinerd|Wikinerd]] 09:04, 30 November 2011 (CST)

::Really, the best they could manage was photos of someone's TV? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:I'm not too sure what to think of the Pancor Jackhammer being in this game, I mean, we've already got the USAS-12 as the automatic shotgun, if they wanted to add in another one, they could've just added in the AA-12. Anyone kinda with me on this? - Long Fallen 14:20, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::Not a fan of automatic shotguns anyway, since they, technically, overshadow the semi-automatic ones (because of selective fire). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)

:::The USAS-12 has competition with the Jackhammer, I haven't unlocked it yet but I remember picking up a kit with the Jackhammer and it was like using a slightly lower capacity DAO-12 with it's 6+1 rounds but with automatic fire rate. This video shows some gameplay, extended mags give it 13+1 magazine capacity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q95ICdl9fsE&feature=related It's apparently "slower than the USAS" from what little experience I've had with it and from people I've asked about it [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)

== MG36 ==
I know that there were only 100 or so MG36s made, but isn't a standard G36 with a bipod foregrip and a double drum mag exactly the same thing? I get that if there's one in a movie it will actually be a G36 with bipod and drum added, but in a game can't it be called an MG36 since it didn't start as something else? Also, it IS an MG, not an AR, unless the RPK, M27, and QBB-95 are ARs too. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:An MG36 has a bipod handguard, C-mag, ''and'' a heavy barrel and reinforced action. This, like basically every other MG36 that has appeared in anything, is based on a standard G36 with a bipod and drum, as the Bundrswehr use. I don't think there's even a specific name for the configuration, but it is ''not'' called MG36. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)
::Oh okay, but would the heavy barrel look any different externally? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:11, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:::I believe it's mostly internal. However, IIRC the MG36 was rejected the same year the MIL-STD-1913 standard was drawn up, so an "MG36" with a flat-top rail would have to be a G36 or an after the fact modification of an MG36, and speculating a gun that isn't real ''must'' be modified is trying a little too hard to cover up a simple naming error. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 20:15, 30 November 2011 (CST)
::::Oh okay, well, if it had the standard carry handle I'd say it should be "MG36", but seeing as it has the "C" one, it's a G36 with a bipod, C-Mag, and G36C rail. To be fair though, MG36 is a ''lot'' easier for the sake of the game. On DICE's part I mean. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:10, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Alex - According to G3Kurz on HKpro, the barrel OD is 30% thicker. http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk-long-gun-talk/94949-wtk-mg36-barrel-question.html Evil Tim - Where did you hear that it had reinforced action? --[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 22:44, 30 November 2011 (CST)

== "Kaffarov" ==

So, is this mission always buggy as hell, or did I just have a bad run screencapping it? As well as that weirdness with the Barrett I had guns inheriting the texture of the floor they were on top of (I have a lovely image of a linoleum QJY-88), some pictures of MP7s with their magazine against their front grip and their stock hovering in front of them at ninety degrees to the gun and every single USAS-12 in the level appearing on the ground with no magazine. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:That always seems to happen with USASs and MP7s, but please, please add the linoleum QJY-88 to the main page, just for laughs :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)

::Also, I really didn't get the last level. Why would you hijack a train that was already going to where you want to go (thus drawing attention to yourself for no good reason), then randomly rig it to explode even though you've already got a nuke on board? And why was one man with a detonator standing in the same room as the explosives that detonator set off? And how did Blackburn know that trigger would set off the random bombs and not the nuke? I have questions, dammit. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:54, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:::You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:::This is my explanation and I know there's several holes in it but bear with me, it makes slightly more sense than just a lack of general explanation. The hijacking of the train was probably a distraction whereby once they got off their intended stop with the nuke, they would send it hurtling somewhere else for the police and other emergency services to follow. This would have then given them an opportunity to get the nuke to Times Square undetected while the emergency services scrambled to stop the train wired with explosives. In terms of the detonator, the guy was probably the patsy to serve as a suicide bomber-type to ensure the distraction seemed like the real deal and to lay blame once again on the PLR rather than Solomon. Blackburn knew that the trigger wouldn't set off the nuke because nukes require specialised arming devices if I'm not mistaken and you can't use a normal detonator to blow it up. Just my explanation of the events. Feel free to lay waste to my over-active imagination that came up with this somewhat cockamamie fill-in to explain the plotholes in the last mission. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:25, 7 December 2011 (CST)
::::The thing is the train was already ''going'' to Times Square, and detonating a nuke underground would create a sinkhole a large chunk of lower Manhattan would fall into; if anything it would be even worse than detonating it on the surface. Solomon could have just sat there alone with the thing in his lap on a timer or dead man's switch, the only purpose the hijacking ultimately served was to draw attention to the fact that something was up.

::::Then again, this story also had my very favourite, the framing device of the protagonist describing the action. I always smile when I imagine how it's going during the actual level. "So then I ducked into cover. Looked up but didn't shoot. Reloaded. Aimed down my sights. Saw a guy ducking out so I fire twice and reloaded and then..." "Weren't we supposed to be on a time limit?" "One Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Seventh Amendment." "Ah, yes, the right to defence in the form of an average-length modern video game." [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:47, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Correct, the train was going to Times Square but perhaps it was not the last station? I'm not sure how the trains work in New York because I don't personally live there but it's possible that Times Square was a station on a longer line of stations where Solomon could have sent the police, ESU, FBI, Homeland Security and whatever government agencies to follow the train rigged with explosives. Creating a sinkhole does seem like a better idea but I think the purpose of blowing it in Times Square itself above ground was to send a message. The mushroom cloud that would be better seen from above ground would strike more fear, in my opinion but hey, that's just my two cents.

:::::In terms of the framing device, I have to agree with the utter ridiculousness of the idea of Blackburn describing the action he performed when recalling every single detail from the playable level but it's far more plausible than Black Ops. Thinking of how Mason could describe every single detail of his action movie experience as well as the experience of the SR-71 Blackbird pilot just made my brain stop completely. Especially when he was extremely doped up and possibly tortured judging by the bloodstains on various parts of his clothing. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:59, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::::::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca4D0-s8OsI&feature=related Believe me, an underground nuclear detonation is hard to mistake for anything else]. As for Blops, I always had the image of the guys questioning him picking up the bottle of truth serum and checking the expiry date when he started with the G11s and WA2000s. Or the whole THE NUMBERS thing just ending up with him forgetting his wife's birthday. "No! Reznov said it was tommorrow!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:11, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::Holy wow. I know that's destructive and it's horrible to say this but that is indeed impressive. My sentiments exactly. However, they probably just went meh because they (as in the interrogators who were CIA) were probably using LSD as a truth serum as well as a mind control drug at the time. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 05:46, 7 December 2011 (CST)

== Question ==

I just got this game (yay! I absolutely love it, even the singleplayer) and I was gonna get screenshots but I heard I need FRAPS. What is FRAPS and how do I get it? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:34, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:It is a program that can record gameplays and you can also take screenshots with a hotkey if it is running in the background. It has a freeware version. I think in the free version it can only save images in BMP, but u can convert them easily. Get if from here: www.fraps.com. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 00:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)

::The free version watermarks videos, not sure if it does the same with screenshots. You're best off saving in BMP since the JPEG captures are pretty abysmal quality with lots of artifacting. Give me a few days first, though, I have fifteen hundred images of the singleplayer I need to sort through. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:29, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:::I just need screenshots and I have Photoshop CS4. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)

::::Then yeah, http://www.fraps.com/ to download the free version. Wikipedia says it doesn't watermark screenshots even on the free version, just be sure you have plenty of HD space since a 1920x1080 BMP weighs 3-6 megabytes. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:05, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::596 GB. :B - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:49, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::: I currently use FRAPS myself. It does not watermark screenshots. Haven't tried getting videos yet. Anyways, the race is on to see who can put up pictures first.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 14:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)

I will be uploading a lot of great screenshots for the page tomorrow, should I add pics of the iron sights or just ones of interest? (ie, misaligned sights, the M9's correct sights, the MEU's tritium sights, etc.) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:45, 8 December 2011 (CST)

:Actually, I'm in favour of having ironsight pictures on all video game pages, since they're so often missaligned, or out of scale, as a lot of what we do here is point out flaws and educate (hopefully) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:06, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::Yay, more work. I need more weight to this. :| - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 02:22, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::Iron sights are fine as long as they're reasonably interesting and the article doesn't have too many weapons; this one should be ok. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:30, 8 December 2011 (CST)

== My God ==

I am so glad with battlefield 3 and mainly dice the are actually listening to the community and something even better they are fixing incorrect guns.

Ex:

Tweaked the AN94 so its burst fire better conveys the real world advantage offered by this weapon.

Added Single Shot to the AN94 as an available fire mode.

Slightly increased the recoil on the M416 and removed the Burst Fire mode (this weapon incorrectly had burst fire, which was not authentic).

from latest patch --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 19:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:Cool! =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:Oh! But HK416 is still called M416? :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:13, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::Wait, really? they removed burst from the 416 and added semi to the 94? Wow, cool! Those were the only fire mode errors too :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:02, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::Well, aside from not being able to fire the spotting rifle on the SMAW. I still think it would be amusing to be able to shoot people with your 9mm tracer that shoots like a rocket. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::What? Oh, looked it up: "Each round consists of a special 9mm tracer bullet, crimped into a 7.62x51mm NATO casing with a .22 Hornet blank cartridge for propellant". That is the most WTF round I've ever heard of :O [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 13:41, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Alex, I don't suppose you could share the link with anyone reading this page? :) -- Long Fallen 14:17, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::::Oh right :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder-launched_Multipurpose_Assault_Weapon [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:58, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::I found a more detailed look at the round here: http://cartridgecollectors.org/cmo/cmo05oct.htm [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 16:49, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::::::I wonder if they're going to fix the "SVD" as well [[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:01, 4 December 2011 (CST)

:Is that just for PC? 'Cause I'm on the PS3 and the HK416 still has a burst mode and the AN-94 still doesn't have semi-auto as a fire mode. Or is this for the campaign? I haven't played the campaign again in a while. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:28, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::With the new patch that came out for the upcoming DLC, Back to Karkand. The AN-94 got the single-shot fire-mode and the HK416 got the burst-fire mode removed. Confirmed on the PC [[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::On the PS3 here, AN-94 still has the automatic/burst selection as before; no semiautomatic fire. The HK416 also still has semi/burst/fire selection. - Long Fallen 23:18, 9 December 2011 (CST)

:::Xbox still has the old AN 94 and M416 fire modes. Also if you use the AN 94 with iron sights and swap back and forth between your pistol, the front sight disappears on the Xbox. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:30, 20 December 2011 (CST)

::::That change is in the next patch we're supposed to get, it takes longer for consoles. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:54, 20 December 2011 (CST)

Any idea of when that is? I just started using the AN 94 and love the two round burst but I'm hindered at long range because of the recoil and rate of fire.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:05, 26 December 2011 (CST)

:No idea, it has to go through certification from MS/Sony and usually takes 2-3 weeks. Ish. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:51, 26 December 2011 (CST)

== Changing Descriptions in screenshots. ==

If you take the screenshot, go ahead and put whatever you want in there. But if you're going to edit my words, do so only if there is a typo, misspell, incorrect information or bad grammar. Seriously, if you want to put your own words so badly, put your own damn screenshots up.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 00:58, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:Your screenshot descriptions read like a filing cabinet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:40, 5 December 2011 (CST)
Then like I said previously, put up your own damn screenshots--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 13:20, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:This is a wiki. The point of a wiki is collaborative editing. As stated in the [[Rules,_Standards_and_Principles#IMFDB_is_an_information_resource.2C_not_our_private_playground | Rules, Standards and Principles]], ''"IMFDB is an information resource, not our private playground."'' --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 13:48, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:And besides, if you take a look at the bottom of the edit window, you'll see it reads: '''If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.''' So... yeah. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:If you're going to get this precious about your screenshots, then don't bother uploading them at all. While IMFDB does have a certain unwritten concept of "uploader's privilege" it does not extend to captions that sound like they were sent in Morse code and don't match the way the other captions already on the page are written and formatted. Also, lose the attitude or you'll be getting some time out. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:50, 5 December 2011 (CST)
::Unless the map or game mode is important to the image, which it usually is not, it should be left out. As for the rest of your captions, I have no problem with what you put, just the map/gamemode doesn't belong here. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:38, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:Fine fine. I didn't know you were an admin so don't ban me just to prove you can. Sorry if I sounded a little terse, but it is annoying having your words re-written constantly. But just one last thing, cause I noticed you mass changed my changes back to what you had, would you mind changing "the player character" to the class? Such as "The US/Russian Engineer in Multiplayer holds the A-91"? (i'll put that screenshot up in a bit)--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:10, 5 December 2011 (CST)
::I mainly do that because the character has no name in multi, it's much easier in single where you can do "Blackburn holds an X." "An engineer holds an X" seems a little awkward in terms of sentence structure; it feels oddly unspecific about the character holding the weapon being the one the player is controlling. I mainly make a deal of saying "the player character holds..." because it annoys me when people say "the player holds..." since the player is either holding a control pad or a mouse. Typically if the player is holding a gun something has gone very badly wrong somewhere along the line. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:28, 6 December 2011 (CST)

::[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] is admin since October 2011, so keep that in mind. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:07, 6 December 2011 (CST)

:::I didn't know that, congrats! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:17, 6 December 2011 (CST)

::I just think that it sounds better than just saying "the player character" because it is just extremely generic. That's why I usually just put "weapon with extra extra extra attatched" without putting player character, cause it's obvious there is a player character holding the weapon. And you don't want people to be holding guns in real life? Tsk Tsk. What kinda firearm wiki admin are you? And relating to that, is there a list of site Admins available? Is it in the forum? Cause I know there's at least 5 of you guys floating around here (plus Bunni, but I have never actually seen him post or discuss something in the main wiki) and it'd be nice to know who they are. --[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 10:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::[[Imfdb :. guns in movies :. movie guns :. the internet movie firearms database:Administrators|There you go]]. Overly long page title BTW. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:29, 7 December 2011 (CST)

As long as you don't edit my post about the PP2000 doing as much damage and throwing pebbles at someones face, that's my gem right there. :p (not like there's anything I can do about if it does get edited) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 13:24, 10 December 2011 (CST)

:I won't change it. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 10 December 2011 (CST)

== Knife used by Dmitri ==

Does anyone know what kind of knife was used by Dmitri in the mission "Comrades"? Its the one he uses to cut the wires in the garage to unlock the gates. It looks ... funky and not very utilitarian--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:06, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:It's a Spetsnaz machete. [http://www.sovietarmystuff.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1160] --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 21:25, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:A more in-depth look here: http://interestingswords.com/machete/russian-machete-taiga.html [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 17:10, 8 December 2011 (CST)

== Furthering the US Army / USMC mix theory ==

IRL USMC use neither [[M26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System|M26 MASS]] nor [[Heckler & Koch M320|M320 GLM]]. Army does. USMC still use [[M203 grenade launcher|M203 GL]] as UGL. As for hand-held grenade launcher... [[Milkor MGL#MGL 140|M32 MGL]]. Spammy for MP but would have worked for SP (like [[Barrett M82#Barrett M107|M107 LRSR]] did). Thoughts shared. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:40, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:Well yeah, and they also don't use the M1A2 Abrams. This seems to be in some nebulous future where the USMC has upgraded all their equipment. Also the M107 was actually pretty stupid since all you did with it was shoot some guys on the other side of a courtyard with a non-magnifying scope. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:44, 9 December 2011 (CST)

::Gotta say, upgrading equipment in the future one 'A' more doesn't seem as excessive as with entirely new one... But yeah, it's still upgrade. Like, say, giving the future US Army the USMC [[Beretta 92 pistol series#Beretta M9A1|M9A1]].
::Heh, that's the wrong mission they put M107 in. Is there any USMC mission where the long range capabilities of M107 would have served better? (Here I'm starting to think of those sniper missions in '''CoD 4''' and '''MoH''') --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:12, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:::I think the best mission to have the M107 in would have been "Rock and a Hard Place," there's a lot of range in that valley. Perhaps even let you pick off officers directing things at the rear so fewer vehicles would show up. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:38, 9 December 2011 (CST)
::::In Operation Swordbreaker I sorta hoped you'd get a chance for some M107 urban action from a sniper point, taking out PLR Insurgents from afar. I'd thought big anti-material plus big city with lots of cover, be a perfect role for an Anti-Material sniper, alas it was used against you rather than use from you. Instead you just got a Mk. 11. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 11:14, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:::::Yeah, I was sad the M107 wasn't put to better use, it's the only time it appears in the ENTIRE game. The only I thing I didn't like in the SP. :( - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 16:31, 9 December 2011 (CST)

http://www.battlefield.com/images/bf3-hooah :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:02, 13 December 2011 (CST)

== Just some silliness ==

I didn't feel like uploading tons of screens for the page today so I'll put these up just for fun.
[[Image:BF3-Falcon Kick!.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Falcon Kick!''']]
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Damn, those alien bastards are gonna pay for shooting up my ride.''']]
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''I'm gonna kick your ass, bitch!''']]
- [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:00, 10 December 2011 (CST)

:Would be cool if the kick could actually have been used as a combat move like in '''F.E.A.R.''' or '''Mirror's Edge''' (also made by EA DICE) :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:42, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:More pictures with included silliness are always welcome to me :D If we could make pictures with captions as hilarious as the ones on the Far Cry 2 page, I would always come to the BF3 page whenever I'm in a bad mood xD -- Long Fallen 22:11, 11 December 2011 (CST)

::Yeah, the Far Cry 2 page is the best page ever created! :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:46, 12 December 2011 (CST)

::Wait, how do you kick? [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:37, 11 December 2011 (CST)

::You can't kick, this animation only happens when your character vaults over a low lying object, like a guardrail or a rock. -- Long Fallen 22:44, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:::Dammit. I am disappoint. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:46, 11 December 2011 (CST)

== Current Page Status / More Images ==

It's amazed me how long the game's been out yet there's still not very many images of all the weapons :/

I've unlocked all the multiplayer weapons, but unfortunately don't have a capture card for my PS3, which I think is moot since most of the current images look like they were taken on the PC's level of detail.

As of right now I love the current format the MP7's listing is in, showing off the accessories it can mount at one time, while also showing off each part of the reload animation. It would also be nice if each listing had the weapon's simple ironsights as the first image, or vice versa.

Either way, we need to make this image complete :D A game like this doesn't deserve to have such a barren imfdb page... -- Long Fallen 22:40, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:It's because the game's too fun to take the time to do it ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:43, 12 December 2011 (CST)

== HK53 ==

Is it only on the 360 version where the HK53 is, for some reason, referred to as the G53? And for some reason it comes standard with a 12x ballistic scope. It's quite amusing, the scope is as long as the gun. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 03:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:It's called G53 on PC as well. [[User:Ramell|Ramell]]
::I think the 12x is a bugged accessory, that's usually only available on those weapons for DICE Employees [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:01, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:::HK53 on PS3, hence that screenshot. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)
::::I had assumed that DICE didn't get the rights to use "HK" because in the description for all other HK guns they are referred to as "made by a German weapons manufacturer". Strange that PS3 uses the "HK".--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 12:44, 18 December 2011 (CST)
:12x Ballistic Scope? Can you take a screenshot and post it here? :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::lol sorry, I don't know the first thing about taking screenshots. I'm sure someone else here could get a screenshot. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::All the BTK guns have the DICE-only attachments unlocked by default, that is to say, all the ones you're never supposed to get. If you want screen shots I'd get them in the next month or less as they'll probly get rid of them in the next patch. 12x Scope: FAMAS, L85A2, HK53, QBZ-95B, QBB-95, MG36. Flash Suppressor: QBU-88, L96. Suppressor: Jackhammer. Note that for the Jackhammer the suppressor doesn't appear on the model in first or third person, the stats don't change, and I'm pretty sure the sound doesn't either, so really, it doesn't exist. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 10:04, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:::DICE-only? Cheating Campers >:O
:::HK53 and QBZ-95B with ballistic scope - would be funny to see :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 17 December 2011 (CST)

== "Realistic" ==

Does it annoy the hell out of anyone else when people talk about how "realistic" BF3 is, specifically compared to MW3? Yes, DICE did a much better job on the modeling and it does have a more realistic ballistics engine, but come on. Every soldier carries around an infinitely reusable parachute? People run around with defibrillators to instantly revive teammates? Somehow the Support class fits an infinite amount of ammo for every caliber in his pocket? Then, of course, every single soldier is trained to use every jet, helicopter and tank, and the jets can be used as taxis with wing mounted seating. Don't get me wrong, these are all things that add to the enjoyment of the game, and they work really well as game mechanics, but not even remotely realistic. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 06:22, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:They call it realistic because using the word "verisimilitude" makes people think you're trying to look clever for the sake of it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:27, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:Yeah, some aspects of the game are unrealistic, but think about it though. Would you really want to play a game where you run out of ammo ever 5 minutes and have to run around and just wait to die or hope you knife someone to take his weapons, and then hope he too hasn't run out of ammo? Or would you want to have to go through a Gran Turismo-esque license course to be able to use every vehicle properly? While some things are clearly over-the-top, I won't argue with that, some things are obviously put in for the gameplay value, for enjoyment. IF the developers truly wanted a realistic game, they'd have the disc eject and destroy itself after you die. Though the defibrillator comment reminded me of something my friend said, "Oh, you come back to life after getting hit directly with a tank shell! Oh here, let me revive this oatmeal!" [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:49, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:Googling "Battlefield 3 is too realistic" and getting matching results is kinda funny. For some interesting comparisons: [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FacklerScaleOfFPSRealism Fackler Scale of FPS Realism] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:28, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::As an airsofter I find it that list really funny. Classic: All FPSs / Realistic: Airsoft :D Seriously though, what I look for when I think realism is things that work how they do in real life, how they have to work, not whether they normally are or should be used in that way. BF3 is rare in that it has the following: Tac and normal reloads all done right, one in the chamber, iron sights and optics lined up/used properly, all fire modes that should be on any weapon present, switching modes does not change the gun's stats (ie switching to semi makes gun more powerful) just the mode, damage (which can never be considered fully realistic) at a reasonable level and based on the calibre, bullet travel time and drop. Now, whether the Marines have the right weapons, vehicles, or camo, and stuff like that comes second to me, because even if they don't use a certain camo, they ''could'' as opposed to one in the chamber, which '''has''' to funtion like that. Russian soldiers don't use, say SG 553s, QJY-88s, or Jackhammers, but they could, and more importantly I can, because first and foremost in mulitplayer I'm me. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 09:58, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:::Well, things like single reload animation, no +1 round in the chamber, fixed firing mode, hitscan, etc. are usually the result of engine limitations. In this regard we can see that [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite-2 Frostbite 2 Engine] is more advanced than [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite Frostbite 1 Engine] (which already had bullet physics; although magcount and overheating from [http://www.moddb.com/engines/refractor-2 Refractor 2 Engine] are absent; it would have also been nice if there were interchangeable magazines). Regarding the equipment it shows how much there [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DidNotDoTheResearch didn't do the research] and [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShownTheirWork shown their work]. Me wants [[Project Reality]] for BF3 :| --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:02, 17 December 2011 (CST)

:I'm not saying that it isn't realistic in some specific areas, sure it is, but it's a video game, and to compare it to COD and say BF is more realistic is kind of like comparing Star Trek to Star Wars and saying Star Trek is more realistic because they used the word "tachyon". That being said, I think all four examples I just used are very evertaining. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 04:56, 16 December 2011 (CST)

== Javelins are the best. ==

Javelin + CITV station on a tank = fantastic combination. The top down fire mode makes killing LAVs and Amtraks, especially on Noshair (sp?) Canals easy, not to mention the massively amusing ability to fire on laser painted aircraft. It's always hilarious to watch an FA/18 blow up and the guy flying just sees FGM-148 Javelin killed him and he wonders what just happened. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 02:22, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:Oh my, sounds like tracer darting in BC2 o_O --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:56, 18 December 2011 (CST)

::And CITV Station + MBT Guided Shells! Lock, fire, triple kill on one Little Bird! Lock, fire, quad on the other. I was 7/0 20 seconds into the game! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:14, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::It's even better against a jet. I just try to imagine the expression on a pilot's face as he wonders how the hell an Abrams just shot down his Flanker. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)

:The Javelins may be the best, however, setting up the SOFLAM is akin to setting yourself up with giant neon lights pointing "I'M RIGHT HERE!" to the enemies. I'm sure DICE had good intentions when programming it so that it wouldn't be ridiculously common and spammy, but it just sort of defeats the point of giving it to the stealthy ninja that the Recon class should be. Not to mention it gets even less useful on Wake Island with the mobile AA guns shooting the bright red light visible from just about any distance with the fury of a thousand angry Russians armed with PPSh's. :/ -- Long Fallen 22:32, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::Oh, the Tunguska, which has the ability of firing every bullet ever made at the same time?[[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::Haha, is there any other? -- Long Fallen 01:26, 20 December 2011 (CST)

== 9K22 Tunguska ==

I've actually just realized that while the page is mostly (half) complete, the 9K22 Tunguska's armaments haven't been added to the page; because I'd like to know exactly how much ammunition for its guns it carries and approximately for how long would it waste it all before running out, since it's a mobile AA platform? -- Long Fallen 01:36, 20 December 2011 (CST)
:Ammunition capacity is 1,904, combined rate of fire is variable between 3,900 and 5,000 rounds per minute, so if we take the lower rate of fire this works out to about 30 seconds of continuous firing. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:45, 20 December 2011 (CST)

::[[Image:2a38m.jpg|thumb|none|400px|2A38M Autocannon - 30x165mm]]
::Example image in case anyone feels like adding. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:36, 22 December 2011 (CST)

== Added a piece of info about the M1014 ==

It's really inaccurate for even a shotgun. I've patterned my shotgun in real life which also has a cylinder bore and the pattern was half the size of the pattern in game. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:46, 20 December 2011 (CST)

:This "short-range shotgun" problem is sadly common in video games, to the point which the TVTropes website has a page just for it. And Frag-12 rounds for the shotguns in this game are horribly overpowered too. I'd take a tighter pattern with a realistic damage-drop-off with distance with buckshot if they could tone down the Frag-12 rounds. For a more realistic shotgun, try playing SWAT 4. You can actually snipe somewhat well with a Benelli Nova in that game if you crouch and wait to become fully accurate.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 20:55, 21 December 2011 (CST)

:SWAT4... It's the same game that also has handgun sniping and guns that do less damage at point blank range. I was disappointed with the 1911 in that game sadly. :( I'd be careful advising anyone to play that game; its mechanics are ungodly finicky. -- Long Fallen 22:23, 21 December 2011 (CST)

::You could snipe with handguns in Battlefield 2 too... That was actually a tactic employed by experienced BF2 snipers: shoot the enemy with bolt-action sniper rifle and then immediately switch to pistol and finish him off ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:20, 22 December 2011 (CST)

:Meh, SWAT 4 isn't as finicky with its mechanics if you know what you're doing. The damage with its guns is somewhat random to reflect how bullets in real life don't always perform as expected (i.e., JHPs clog with clothing and fail to expand, 5.56mm FMJ fails to fragment once inside a target if the bullet isn't properly constructed or the barrel it's fired from is too short, etc.). though I will admit that the M1911 and other .45 ACP guns are underpowered in that game. But I think the reason as to why "handgun sniping" has persisted up until now is that modelling ballistic physics for bullets en masse was only possible when the right programming and hardware appeared. The BF2 example was probably implemented as well given the limited draw distance of the engine; without an omnipresent zoom system to represent how your eyes can focus on far-off objects (like in ARMA 2) the limitations of pixels on our monitors means that enemies become unrecognizable jumbles of pixels at distances we would still be able to clearly see them in real life. Also, because adjustable sights are hard to model in games (as opposed to scopes with ballistic drop markings), pistols often don't have ballistic drop either. I tried compensating for ballistic drop while shooting pistols in the STALKER series--because the iron sights on pistols can't be adjusted it's very difficult, since essentially the muzzle will obscure your target when you aim high to compensate.

:But the sooner we get realistic shotgun buckshot spreads and ranges in games, the better. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 14:02, 22 December 2011 (CST)

::The problem is, the zoom system only activates when you press a button. So any time you don't, the environment is presented in its distant form. This gives an edge to the person who secured a position and now zooms in in the enemy direction, while the enemy is on the move and can't see said person. In reality, they should see each other evenly. I like this absence of bionic eyes in [[Project Reality]]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:26, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:So you have to hold down the button in ARMA2 to focus on distant objects? Well, a toggle system would be much better (probably combined with using a "dynamic zoom" system that used your mouse wheel or two keys to zoom in and out so you could vary the amount of zoom much like your eyes can focus across a great deal of ranges). Still, given the pixellation problem that I mentioned earlier, all PCs in Project Reality have to carry binoculars so as to focus on distant targets, but these cannot be combined with weaponry, so if you're using a kit that has no optics for your gun and are trying to hit something that you can't really see unmagnified (even though in real life you would be able to see and hit a target at that distance), tough luck. Project Reality is also going in the process of making a version based on the ARMA2 engine as well. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 18:17, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::Adjustable Zoom would be nice. Sadly, developers haven't yet caught the idea. Even adjustable FOV is not in every modern shooter (and where it is, it might be limited).
::It works both ways in PR: you have problems seeing an enemy in the distance and an enemy has problems seeing you ;) And yes, I'm aware of PR for ArmA II. [http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-reality-arma2 It's currently v0.1], right at the starting line. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:47, 24 December 2011 (CST)

== M1014 magazine tube length ==

Can someone explain to me what's going on with the magazine tube length of the M1014 in-game? The weapon art models show the typical length, but in-game, the magazine length looks like a M3. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 13:12, 27 December 2011 (CST)

The pump action shotguns in the game start with four round mag tubes. Therefore the art models depict them as such. However, when you unlock "Extended Magazines", the in world model changes to the six round tube for both the Remington and the Benelli.--[[User:GLOCK10mil|GLOCK10mil]] 16:18, 27 December 2011 (CST)

:Didn't think of that. Thank you. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 17:03, 27 December 2011 (CST)

== UMP trigger group ==

It seems the world model for the H&K UMP has safe, semi-auto, and full auto, even though the in-game weapon operates with a selectable 2-round burst.--[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 14:53, 28 December 2011 (CST)
:If that's true than it is an error, though the UMP ''can'' have a full/2/semi/safe trigger group. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:32, 28 December 2011 (CST)

== Back To Karkand Weapons ==

So I've been playing B2K a lot, and I've gathered a bunch of trivia about some of the guns that could be added to the page, but I'm not so knowledgable about them so I thought I'd leave them here so someone who knows more can add them into the page.

The L85A2 has three round burst as well as auto and semi, which as far as I know it doesn't in real life. It also can't mount the M320 which, again as far as I know, is the grenade launcher it mounts in real life. It's also 'cocked' by pressing a bolt release just above the magwell.

The FAMAS also has burst as well as semi and auto, again I don't know if this is true in real life.

Both the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B and burst as well as automatic and semi, but I'll admit I know nothing about these weapons. The QBZ-95B and the QBU-88 are reloaded similarly to the AN94/AEK-971 (new mag is used to push the mag release and then inserted) and it looks absolutely bizarre in first person because they're bullpup.

Also, the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B are chambered in 5.45x39mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm and the QBU-88 is chambered in 7.62x54mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm.

That's all I've got [[User:Nikonov|Nikonov]] 18:17, 9 January 2012 (CST)

:The FAMAS does have all three, and a lot of the info screens are wrong or somewhat wrong, pretty sure they're just copy-pasting errors as opposed to them not knowing the calibre. Everything else you said is correct as far as I know. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:34, 9 January 2012 (CST)

::Well, if they are copy-pasting errors then someone should tweet Demize about it ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:10, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::The reload animation for those Chinese rifles doesn't use the magazine to push the old mag out. The character pulls out a new mag and pulls the old one out with just his fingers but has the magazine in hand to load into the gun right after. I saw a video of it with an AK once.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:49, 9 January 2012 (CST)

::I'm assuming DICE watched this video, I don't have a clue if this is what they teach in the PLA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMmaIZ8Umnk--[[User:Mattatack92|Mattatack92]] 00:40, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:IRL L85A2 mounts not [http://www.hk-usa.com/-images/products/m320/lg_m320_3.jpg M320] but a different variant of AG36, called [http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v470/Black_Hawk_169/DSC00005.jpg UGL]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:07, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::I just Tweeted Demize about the calibre and ROFs being sometimes wrong for the BTK guns. :) Also, he says he's not going to add the HK79 and GL1 due to memory issues, which is fair. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:16, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:::That would make a nice "GL Pack" DLC though: GL1, HK79, M203, UGL... And more, should the carbines get corresponding rifle variants :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:20, 11 January 2012 (CST)

Also interesting, the QBZ-95's ironsights glitch when you fire. Actually helps. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:23, 10 January 2012 (CST)

I don't have a Twitter, could someone suggest something small on the HUD on hardcore modes that show what fire mode your gun is set to? I change it a lot and the guns with three settings make it difficult.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:43, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:I agree, and Tweeted :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:56, 11 January 2012 (CST)
::Would be kind of cool if in hardcore mode you could actually look down at your weapon and see the fire selector or check how many rounds are in the magazine. If you think having no HUD is "hardcore," just imagine having to actually worry about taking your eyes off the battleground long enough to check on your weapon like that. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:14, 22 January 2012 (CST)

== Pancor Jackhammer ==

Why? Not only is this weapon relatively pointless since they included the USAS-12 (it seems to recoil less and that's about it) but it comes with a freaking suppressor. Of all the useless devices you can equip to a weapon as insanely loud as the Jackhammer theoretically would be, this and an under-barrel can opener would just about top the list. (I presume they put it on there because the revolving magazine system of the Jackhammer has some similarities to that of a Nagant M1895.) Also, why in the hell is the freaking thing even in the game? There's supposedly a grand total of two of the dumb things in existence. If we're going to throw in an automatic shotgun prototype that never made it into production, how about the H&K CAWS? That one was actually tested by the US military. In another world, it could have been adopted. Or, hell, the Atchisson AA-12. Don't get me wrong, the Jackhammer is a cool looking gun, but it never made it off the design bench and I'm a ''little'' tired of seeing it crop up in video games claiming at least some level of real world veracity (the world "realistic" is a silly one to use for FPS games). [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:24, 22 January 2012 (CST)
:It's supposed to be for the nostalgia, I guess, since it was an unlockable in BF2. Much like them keeping that "DAO-12" name for the Protecta, though it's now a Street Sweeper. There were actually quite a few Jackhammer prototypes, but only two that fired fullauto. Or rather didn't, which is why there were only two. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:38, 22 January 2012 (CST)

:They will put XM8 as military tested weapon, methinks. CAWS was pretty cool gun in [[Jagged Alliance 2]] :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:52, 22 January 2012 (CST)

::As stated, it's in because it was in BF2, that's the point of the Back To Karkand pack. Also, it doesn't actually have a suppressor. Well, it does, but it's invisible and does not change any stats whatsoever, not even making you not appear on the minimap. So, there's just a pretend option for a suppressor. Why? Same reason the two ARs, two Carbines, and two MGs have 12x scopes, and the two Sniper Rifles have Flash Suppressors: it was an oversight, those are the attachments you're supposed to ''never'' get those attachments, only DICE gets them, because they're silly. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:10, 22 January 2012 (CST)

Well the suppressor actually does do something, it cuts damage down. I actually like the Pancor though, with frag rounds, ext mags, and a Holo sight I can clear out most hallways on metro. But, that is pretty much the only map it is of any use on.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 16:47, 22 January 2012 (CST)

:::Oh geez, way for me to miss the obvious. I forgot about it being in BF2, having not played the "older" games in quite a while. (Why does 2005 seem so long ago?) Actually, I was a little sad that B2K didn't include the option to hijack semi-trucks and civilian cars like you could with the Armored Fury booster pack. At least you can borrow a Bobcat on Wake Island and try to run enemy soldiers down with it for nothing other than sheer comedy value... And the other "weird" attachments (okay, maybe not the flash suppressor) are at least ''sort of'' useful. You can be extremely annoying with the MG36 fitted with a 12x - no sniper likes dodging nearly-accurate long range machine gun fire, and anything that snipers don't like is fine with me. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 04:26, 4 February 2012 (CST)

== Dog Tag Weapons ==
I vote we add a section either at the bottom of the page for all of them, or at the end of each class of weapons for them, because there are a LOT of guns on dog tags that aren't actually in the game. (SAA, SCAR-L, proper MG36, standard FAMAS, that weird suppressed Makarov PM variant, M203, and lots more) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:25, 26 January 2012 (CST)
:If no one objects to this, I'm going to create a sub-catagory at the bottom of each weapon class (SMG, shotgun, etc) that has all the Dog Tag-only weapons, because this page will get very confusing if we don't, as none of those weapons are in the game, just pictures of them. So far (of the top of my head) Makarov PB, Single Action Army, M1911A1, SPAS-12, SCAR-L, FAMAS (standard), M203, M16A2, M16A1, MG36 (proper). I'm sure there are more, but that's what I can think of right now. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:45, 4 February 2012 (CST)
::I've added everything I know of, but there are probably more. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:46, 8 February 2012 (CST)

== Patch is still yet to reach Xbox it appears ==

It appears as though the Xbox has been forgotten since the AN 94 still just has two fire modes and the HK416 still has it's three fire modes. Does anyone know more about it than me? --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:59, 17 February 2012 (CST)

:Yeah, we never got that patch that the other two platforms did. I'm assuming it'll be rolled into the patch that was originally supposed to come out for all platforms this month, but is now going to be in March at the earliest. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:57, 18 February 2012 (CST)

::Nope, here on the PS3 it's still the same, three-mode HK416 and two-mode AN94. DICE has gone on to say that across all consoles the stats are very different; however, the next patch will put all weapons on equal ground across all platforms. -- Long Fallen 02:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== All Fancy Right Side Dog Tags ==
I'm going to add this to the page soon, to replace the Dog Tag Weapons sections I made before, but right now I need sleep. They're sorted by the name of the real weapon in game, not in game name and not name of weapon in the picture, if those are different. If any of you can figure out what the not-actually-a-QBB-95 is, let me know :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:36, 1 March 2012 (CST)

[[Image:BF3_500KillGuns.jpg|thumb|none|650px]]

:You have no idea how grateful I am to see this in a neat compilation! Been looking everywhere for just these designs to no avail. -- Long Fallen 02:46, 2 March 2012 (CST)
I think the QBB-95 is a totally made up frankengun. However the core of it is actually an Enfield L85, you can tell by the vent holes on the receiver: 3 horizontal vents at the rear, then a slightly larger gap followed by two slightly smaller vents. Also visible is the raised portion on the bottom edge of the upper receiver which runs horizontally under these vent holes, and the pistol grip and trigger guard seem to match. On top it seems to be a grossly oversized M4/M16A4 detachable carry handle, and the front is anyone's guess. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:56, 2 March 2012 (CST)
::Yeah, I think you're right. It also has the generic bipod most guns in BF3 use, Harris Bipod I think it's called. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== Flash Suppresor ==
I know this is really not important and probably no one cares, but I think the flash suppresor may be a Vltor VC-1. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 17:15, 1 March 2012 (CST)
:You found it! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:28, 1 March 2012 (CST)

::Not important? Any info is very welcome on this site! In fact, I was wondering this myself. -- Long Fallen 02:48, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== 3 Expansions planned for BF3 ==

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/03/07/battlefield-3-close-quarters-announced.aspx

Newest expansion has 10 new guns, what are you guys thinking/hoping they will be? I'm hoping for a USP, perhaps another pump action shotgun,maybe a TAR or a Galil, and an XM8 (wishful thinking on that last one, but they put the Jackhammer in, so why not?) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 18:20, 7 March 2012 (CST)

EDIT: Can someone fix that link please? I'm not very good at this clearly.

Me being the AR fanboy that I am, I just want a short barreled AR (10 inches prefferably). cheech98 9:28, 7 March 2012

:HK416. I'd like to see another pump shotty and some pistols at the least. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:49, 7 March 2012 (CST)

Definitely a pump shotgun, maybe an Ithica or a Mossberg with wood furniture (because with black furniture it would look too much like the 870). I would like to see an AK in 7.62x39. I was honestly appalled that BF3 didn't feature a .30 cal AK. An MP5, a Hi-Power, a CZ-75 and a SIG-Sauer would also be nice; a non-tacticool FAL, maybe an FNC (always loved that gun), a Skorpion (come on, who doesn't wanna shoot that thing in a video game), the VZ-58, the HK P7 perhaps? The HK33 would be an awesome weapon to see (although admittedly not too plausible), an Uzi (full size or mini, doesn't really matter to me), a Makarov (still common among the Russian Armed Forces, right?), the P99, and MORE REVOLVERS, DAMMIT. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 02:04, 8 March 2012 (CST)

Talk:Battlefield 3

2012-03-08T08:04:12Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* 3 Expansions planned for BF3 */

See [[Talk:Battlefield 3/Archive 1]] for older discussions.

__TOC__

== Why am I not surprised? ==

Part of me isn't too surprised that the CODMW3 article would be taken off the Work in Progress Status in a much shorter time than BF3's page. Personally I think MW3 committed a war crime with how atrocious the M16A4 looks both in the first person and 3rd person models of it. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:00, 16 November 2011

:Just the M16? :/ Hell, the P99 is the only pistol where they didn't get something wrong. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:14, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:It has more to do with the fact that MW3 makes more mistakes and therefore is far more fun to write about. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:18, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::My personal favourite screw up in MW3 has to be the Skorpion's scope rail mount, with the "MG36" as a close runner up. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 03:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::I still mad about the fact they suddenly decided that it'll better that the M4A1 will have a 20-round magazine rather than a 30-round magazine -_- --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 03:05, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:::Lol good points all around. I'm not too knowledgeable on everything but I'm in the service and I use the M16A4 often. So it stuck out like a sore thumb the moment I picked up the rifle in the game that something was really freaking off about it. Like it wasn't already bad having 30 rounds come out of a 20 round mag. But bolt on rails to A2 Handguards? Really?! XDDD I don't know how accurate that P99 is, but it irks the hell out of me seeing it held one handed in the First Person Model. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:25 16 November 2011

Ya know? It's funny that the "fact" they are using military advisers to make the game better in "tactics" and stuff (yeah, right), this military advisers or what ever, aren't aware of the way the developers model the weapons and doesn't 100% reassemble to the real life one's :/ I guess the developers tell them "We don't really give a damn about realism, just tell us how the hell modern warfare works"... Still, the guys of BF3 made a bit better, though it does have also many things unrealistic, like the fact Marines are using M16A3's instead of M16A4's, and some of them running with an M240 like it a was wooden gun. Sigh. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 02:57, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:The thing about an advisor is that his job is to answer questions. It's up to the developers if they a) ask him the right questions and b) pay attention to his answers. I believe ''Star Trek's'' science advisors have publically complained that they're only asked for advice on what terminology to use and never on whether something is actually good science. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:15, 16 November 2011 (CST)

One thing SP Campaign of BF3 proves is that BF3 shouldn't have SP Campaign in the first place. One would expect it to be more authentic, yet it takes approach of CoD: "We just put randomly weapons we have in MP whether or not they fit in". So suddenly we have Marines with M16A3s and M240Bs (instead of M16A4s and M240Gs), insurgents (exactly insurgents and not organized militia from pre-alpha trailers) with AK-74Ms and AEK-971s (instead of AK-47s / AKMs), Spetsnaz member Vladimir with 5.56 A-91 (despite Russian forces simply not using this caliber even for SF), etc. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:27, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:Let's not forget that the protagonist of the game, Blackburn, during the interrogations scenes, you can see his name and branch tags that they're in white and straight rather than MARPAT and in an angle with the chest pockets. Also, one of the the guys in Blackburn's team, though I can't remember his exact name (the guy who carries M136 all the time), wears MultiCam OCP, still, rather than MARPAT uniform. Eventually, war games wouldn't be realistic as real life, even in the small parts. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 11:22, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Except my games (If I ever make games). :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 11:34, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Plus, they (Marines) get CAS from Little Birds. Apparently, to the game devs the terms 'US Army' and 'USMC' are interchangeable. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:50, 16 November 2011 (CST)

:I don't recall the insurgents using AEK-971s in the Iran missions, usually it was a random stew of your typical AKS-74u, AK-74M (don't real militants from the former Soviet bloc use the more modern 5.45 AK-74 at times?), RPKs, and the KH2002. However, the terrorists with Solomon from later on in the story do use all this, and even more somewhat outlandish equipment. Also, since the page is incomplete, can you explain to me how you identify the Marine's M16 models as the A3 versions? During the campaign I recall Blackburn's M16 as being able to fire in fully automatic. (Except that one mission where you inexplicably jump off with an HK416) Also, didn't Vladimir use the AS VAL throughout the Spetsnaz missions? And although it's not top-notch realistic Ala ''The Hurt Locker'', I wouldn't exactly outright call it the CoD approach. I mean, just look at what they did with Black Ops. Pointing out every inaccuracy in that game is to the point of turning it into a drinking game. Long Fallen 17:49, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Other than that one HK416 Blackburn had, which was odd, if they worst things the Marines had were M16A3s instead of A4s and M240Bs instead of M240Gs, then I'm happy enough. And the PLR only had 74Ms, 74Us, and RPKs if I remember correctly, the later enemies had AEKs. All the weird guns were given to Kaffarov's private army, as he is an arms dealer. It's like complaining you see a few M1928s instead of M1A1s in a WWII movie. Black Ops.. is Black Ops, and MW3 had FADs in the hands of African militia... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:20, 16 November 2011 (CST)

::Maybe it is related to the "AKS-74U vs. UMP issue": in some of the videos of "Operation Swordbreaker", inside of the building, leading to anti-sniper position, one of the insurgents is certainly equipped with AEK-971, with others having AKS-74U and AK-74M (AK-74 would be correct for former Soviet bloc militant but not AK-74M unless he managed to scavenge it from Russian soldier). For M16A3, check one of the Marines on the way to bridge in the same mission. And while Kiril used the AS "Val", Vladimir used the 5.56 A-91. And yes, as Alex said, Black Ops... is Black Ops *sadface* --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:17, 17 November 2011 (CST)

:::You are right, that one insurgent always has an AEK, but that's an exception. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:31, 17 November 2011 (CST)

Cod always screws up the guns
:What does that have to do with Battlefield 3? [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:12, 22 January 2012 (CST)

== Sidearms ==

Has anyone else noticed Campo carries ''two'' sidearms, one on his chest and one by his hip? Looks like two Glocks.

[[Image:BF3-Glock-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Ten more and he'll be a Glockenspiel.]]

[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:18, 18 November 2011 (CST)

:I'm sorry, but that caption was just too good. On topic however, it seems as if the handgun holstered on his chest seems pretty low res to be made out. Could it be a designer oversight or something? - Long Fallen 17:21, 18 November 2011 (CST)

::Maybe they are copying Epps from [[Transformers: Dark of the Moon]], he nonsensically carries a pair of Glocks in the same way as well... --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 18 November 2011 (CST)

::Well, that's the Assault kit's chest, with the Glock and all, so they most likely gave him a leg holster and forgot about that one. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:01, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:::It's like in MW2 where the snipers carry unusable M1911. Although it is peculiar that the Marine in this game carries unusable Glock and not M9 or MEU(SOC). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:17, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== BTK Weapons ==

Finally! http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg

:MG36 and Jackhammer? Guess the XM8 and plasma rifle will be in the next DLC. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:30, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:I guess that confirms that there will be no PLA Faction DLC *sadface* I still hope for EU Faction :|
:Also confirmed that HK53 is back intact :)
:--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Why do they choose to include the "HK" prefix in the HK53, but not on the M416? [[User:Santos|Santos]] 11:26, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:::I'll ask Demize why this HK is okay (and the HK21 in BF2). Actually, they hinted they might do more weapon DLCs later, so I'm expecting a "Back To Bad Company" pack with all three XM8s and other stuff. Also, not a plasma rifle, but I've always thought it'd be cool to see Halo guns in another game, the human ones. For those of you that don't know, they all make functional sense. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:48, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::::lol yeah all those functional Spartan Lasers we have lying around. Though it would be cool to see an NTW-20 in a videogame. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:45, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:::::[http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle Have] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle1 you] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle2 said] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle3 NTW-20]? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:34, 12 December 2011 (CST)

== RPK ==

Incidentally, I need to check if the RPK-74 has a flash hider. If not, with wood furniture and a ribbed metal magazine, it's actually an RPK with a sight rail, not a -74 at all. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:10, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Maybe I didn't spend enough time using it, but I remember it having black furniture. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:44, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Checking my PS3 video captures it's very dark brown; more to the point, though, it's got that standard AK-style handguard with two holes through the middle (with a RIS foregrip sticking out the bottom, admittedly); the -M polymer handguard is a different shape and has ridges all along the top of the gas tube.

::[[Image:Soviet RPK-74.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK-74 light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]
::[[Image:rpk74m.jpg|thumb|none|601px|RPK-74M light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]
::[[File:BF3-RPK-1.jpg|thumb|none|601px|]]

::If it doesn't have a flash hider, I think that makes it an RPK. I thought I could see one there, but in my PS3 video it looks like it doesn't have one and the in-world and pickup models don't have one either. I was going to say "except the scope mount" but MPM's RPK image has one:

::[[Image:RPK lmg.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK Light Machine Gun with 40 round magazine - 7.62x39mm]]

::Is this normal? From what I'd read the scope bracket was an -M thing. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:35, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::Thanks for clearing up the RPK differences, as for the scope rail, scopes are nice to have sometimes, I'm sure some of the older RPKs were fitted with scope mounts as aftermarket parts in real life. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:06, 20 November 2011 (CST)
::::As the RPK in the game only has the bracket fitted when a sight is there, I would certainly put it in the "aftermarket" category. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:37, 20 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Oh right, just like the AKS-74U becomes an AKS-74UN when mounted with optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:47, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Just to assure you this ''does'' happen (it's so nice having a PS3 video of half the game to pull shots from):

:[[Image:BF3-RPKForegrip.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]

:RPK with inexplicable foregrip. I'd just forgotten they don't all have that. Also, is it just me or is the scope mounting screwed to the side of the dust cover rather than attached to a bracket? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)

== Single Action Army ==

Just letting you guys know, as stated on its page it is called Single Action Army on this site as there are so many nearly identical replicas calling it the more correct Colt 1873 might actually be wrong, and SAA is used as a catch-all term. However, just as we assume a full-size Glock is a 17 unless we can tell otherwise, we also assume a gun in a game is not a clone, unless we can tell otherwise. Therefore, it is assumed that the drawing of the SAA is the original Colt 1873, and should be named as such. This is just to avoid an edit war, or something. :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== M224 ==

I don't know about Xbox, but on the PS3 the M224 definitely has an M7 baseplate in multiplayer. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 15:54, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Yup, it has one on 360. Lol at the baseplate having a designation :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:19, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Feel free to change it, I was going off it not having one in single. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:31, 19 November 2011 (CST)

== Kaffarov's Private Army ==

While I understand that Kaffarov is an arms dealer, it boggles my mind how so many times in fiction there are people who are able to procure such military spec equipment like the F2000, Mk.17 (SCAR-H), AEK-971, and so many others. Surely the companies and or countries that produce them don't freely sell them to whatever buyers there are? My question is how would people like Kaffarov even be able to avoid the system and acquire such equipment? I don't know if it has been answered elsewhere, or for obvious reasons '''hasn't''', but it's just something that I haven't been able to explain logically. -- Long Fallen 18:03, 19 November 2011 (CST)

:Reminds me of [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Legionnaire Legionnaire] from [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Battlefield:_Bad_Company Battlefield: Bad Company]. And that guy paid his mercenaries in ''gold bars'', mind you. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Kaffarov... Makarov... Kaffarov... Makarov... Is it only me or does BF3 is trying to copy MW3 in many matters? :/ --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 23:29, 19 November 2011 (CST)

::Um, what's so suspicious about Russian (or Russified) surname ending in -ev or -ov? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::I'm not sure either, but it lets us have the cool guns people don't really use, so it gets a pass in my books. Also, those two names aren't really that similar, and the characters are nothing alike. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:12, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:To answer the question, no. Any customer who could afford top-drawer equipment would be dealing directly with the company that made it, the kinds of people who go to dodgy arms dealers want weapons that are simple enough to equip illiterate militiamen with, cheap enough to equip a ''lot'' of them with, and have widely available spare parts and ammunition. It's no longer the era when unpaid former Soviet commanders would empty entire arms depots onto the black market and flee to countries that don't have extradition treaties with Russia, and no longer the era when you could get a superpower to pony up a whole bunch of equipment and training just by saying you were fighting for / against communism. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:46, 20 November 2011 (CST)

::I see, but I recall this story from a few years back -[http://www.expatica.com/be/news/local_news/factory-tightens-security-after-gun-thefts-23226.html Stolen Five-seveNs from FNH factories] (I had no idea the P90 was a handgun xD) - And then there's this too -[http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20081112_worrying_signs_border_raids Mexican drug cartels being armed with P90s and Five-seveNs] So I still want to know, what are the likely chances of seeing terrorists with such equipment? I mean, these articles seem to bring it to light. (Sorry if I'm going off topic) -- Long Fallen 00:42, 21 November 2011 (CST)

:::With Mexico it's a situation where a lot of the top-class armament is purchased in the United States and smuggled across the border; similar arrangements were used to smuggle arms to the IRA during The Troubles in Northern Ireland. That's the "buying directly from the supplier" kind of deal, and is usually done without a dealer acting as an intermediary (because the Cartels have enough money to do it themselves, or take the weapons in part payment for supplying product to drug dealers). Your typical Eastern Bloc / African arms dealer just buys up weapons somewhere a war is ending and ships them to where a war is still going on, because the buyers don't have the contacts, legitimacy or resources to do it by themselves. A lot of the guns these guys circulate have been involved in local conflicts for years or even decades.

:::Top-end hardware typically comes from governments and organisations. Insurgents in Iraq didn't get top-of-the-line anti-tank weapons and training in making IEDs from some guy in the business of moving weapons, they got them from sympathisers in places like Iran. Alarmism about what ''kind'' of weapons terrorists have is pretty foolish anyway, since generally they prefer the instant, indiscriminate destruction of explosives to trying to shoot people with a gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::::Ah, I see, thanks for enlightening me :) -- Long Fallen 20:25, 21 November 2011 (CST)

Whoever said "a lot of the top-class armament...blah blah Mexico... smuggled from US..." is rather wrong. The Mexican cartels who have P90s and M16s and etc western weaponry are getting it from the Mexican military and police, only a small percentage of the guns near the US border are actually smuggled in to Mexico from the US. The numbers seem higher because recently Mexico has been sending in stores of arms they have confiscated over the past X amount of years (that they know can be most likely traced to the US) to get traced at the same time. This leads to a overblown number that looks good on anti-firearms pamphlets. If you think about it a bit, what do you think would be easier and cheaper:

1. Finding and paying someone to buy 10 semi-automatic guns in the US at ridiculous prices, risking him getting caught, losing your money, going through all the background checks, etc, then sneaking them over the border. Not to mention finding ammo.

Or

2a. Paying some guerrillas in some SA country x amount of dope to bring in a ship, container, truck, or plane full of 100s or 1000s of eastern bloc or former US military weaponry, that is most likely going to be fully automatic. Plus large quantities of ammo for said weaponry.

2b. Stealing or buying from a corrupt military/ police official brand new weaponry.

The "X% of guns in Mexico are from the US" myth is a fallacy created by the Mexican and US govts and heavily compounded by the ATF smuggling them themselves or letting them walk, and the FBI for not laying out the specifics of the stats. Then the subsequent (ratings improving) media hype compounds it further.

Not saying it doesn't happen, just that it is greatly exaggerated.

Now as for how someone like Kaffarov would get the weaponry, its pretty simple. 1. Start a (possibly dummy) corporation (possibly in a different country). 2. Buy from a manufacturer saying they are intended for "security", or "testing", or hell, even arming your own "PMC". 3.Lock and load. How do you think PMCs such as Xe (Blackwater), AirScan, Aegis DS, etc.. get their new "HSLD" weaponry? Most international arms trafficking treaties do not extend to selling firearms to private entities in the same way they do governments.
Respectfully, the (somewhat intoxicated)-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 02:33, 22 November 2011 (CST)

:I wasn't saying it's the majority source, just the source of the more pricey / modern equipment. These people have supply networks that move ''tons'' of drugs across the border, they're not going to consider moving guns in the other direction a substantial risk; one would imagine their US buyers are probably the same people who buy their drugs, considering they're already going to be smuggling stuff back as payment and keeping their activities secret. Most of the weapons they get from the US aren't purchased legally (the big myth is they're bought legitimately from normal gun stores, SO WE MUST CLAMP DOWN ON THIS). Most of their stuff is indeed bought in from other sources, but weapons like the Barretts aren't going to be coming from just anywhere, and there ''is'' precedent from this happening in Northern Ireland where the IRA got a lot of their best weapons from Irish expatriates in America.

:As for Kaffarov, the main problem with the mythical top-end arms dealer is who he's supposed to sell these rare weapons on to, not how he'd get them himself. Sure, if it's ''just'' equipment for his private troops he might splash out, but he wouldn't be wholesaling in exotic arms with rare ammo and parts because nobody would buy them, plus he'd have problems with the companies he's buying from wondering why their weapons are suddenly turning up in conflict zones in the exact quantity they're selling them to his shell company. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 22 November 2011 (CST)

::I know who! He's obviously selling to the Russian Army, Brazilian and African militants, and Makarov's terrorists in MW2 and MW3! [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:32, 23 November 2011 (CST)

: From what I remember in the BF3 novel Kaffarov was a former GRU agent handling weapons and training with then political ally Iran, who got too deep in the local agendas and was probably compromised. IN the novel his weapons were less new (Uzis and shit), but I could totally buy that Kaffarov was still connected enough to Russia's arms trade that he could probably weasel crates of AEK971s out of them without too much trouble. Supposedly that's how Solomon got the suitcase nukes in the first place anyway, off Kaffarov. (as a note the book's plot is little more coherent than the game, probably worth the pickup if you're trying to dissect the game's narrative.)--[[User:Toadie|Toadie]] 04:17, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:This entire discussion is clearly a case of thinking way harder about what Kaffarov is hypothetically capable of procuring for his men than DICE did while they were working on the game. As for the whole "Mexico Gun Smuggling Debate" - try reading some academic reports on the subject before claiming that the statistics were cooked up ([http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Chapter%206-%20U.S.%20Firearms%20Trafficking%20to%20Mexico,%20New%20Data%20and%20Insights%20Illuminate%20Key%20Trends%20and%20Challenges.pdf Wilson Centre: U.S Firearms Trafficking to Mexico] is a long read, but it does illuminate the various ways guns are smuggled and how they are interdicted) --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 16:41, 23 November 2011 (CST)

well look at the Libyan civil war were both sides were able to get massive amounts of G-36s --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 20:38, 23 November 2011 (CST)

Most of the weapons such as Barretts, M16s, etc.. are coming from the Mexican military. As for the IRA in the 80s I know all about that, that was a different time. Many things happened back then that could not happen now. Plus the IRA stopped getting guns from the US when they realized it was easier to get them from places like Palestine and etc..
With Libya... well HK is in deep right now for selling to some state police in Mexico that they shouldn't be selling to, it wouldn't surprise me if they sold to Libya and other places.
And Markit, the report you linked to actually states in a couple places that the reports are skewed by many factors.
This can state the facts better than I can: http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/90PercentMyth.pdf
-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 00:57, 24 November 2011 (CST)
:There was also an incident during the Georgia-Russia war where Georgian SF were seen with G36s that they previously weren't known to have. HK weapons are turning up in all kinds of strange places. :S [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:28, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:@Ranger01 - There's no verifiable proof that all those high-end weapons are coming solely from Mexican law enforcement - last time I checked, they could get better weapons than the FN PS90s, Romanian WASR clones, MAK-90s, AR-15 clones with the post-ban features, SKS rifles with Tapco furniture etc. that have been turning up in seizures of cartel arsenals. I know that the 90% statistic was erroneous, but I also do not believe that the percentage is only 12% according to your report (extrapolating only from serial numbers is faulty in itself when criminals usually take measures to remove/modify them). Besides, the "most deadliest weapons come from Central America" does not equal "most of the weapons come from Central America", which seems to be the tack that your article is taking. Also erroneous is the claim that Mexican military personnel are defecting and taking "American-made" weapons with them - the "150,000" figure was for desertions (which take place for any number of reasons in a conscription-based system) and most soldiers are armed with Mexican-produced versions of H&K weapons.

::On an additional note, the G36s that were seen in Libya were likely a gray market sale - a firm buys the weapons with the end user certificate for one country, ships them there, then transfers them to the actual destination. A more controversial story would be that FN directly sold several hundred FN 2000s, FN 303s and P90s to Libya in 2009-2010. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 18:32, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::Politics aside, F2000s would be ''great'' for a desert country; they're almost airtight. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:22, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::Well Saudi Arabia did adopt the F2000 as their standard rifle. -- Long Fallen 21:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Hmm, didn't know that. As probably most of us are, I haven't had hands on on most of these, but am well read on them, and the F2000 would be one of my first choices of assault rifle if I had a country/army :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:51, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::::Now it's just a matter or wondering if they'll ever get around to using them... Sad is the day when hundreds of beautiful F2000s sit untouched in Arabian armories, gathering up dust. It's enough to bring a tear to any IMFDB user's eye xD -- Long Fallen 02:43, 27 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::Researchers point to '''Heckler & Koch G3A3''' being replaced with '''Steyr AUG''' in Saudi Arabian Army[http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_standard_infantry_rifle_for_saudi_arabian_army][http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110305182603AA3EBn4] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:13, 27 November 2011 (CST)

::::::::So the SA National Guard bought the 55,000 F2000s... but the AUG was on issue? Did it replace the AUG? The standard rifle is the G3A3 as of now? A lot of this information feels so outdated. -- Long Fallen 16:19, 27 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::::Saudi Arabian National Guard is separate from Saudi Arabian Army. An analogy would be 'Waffen-SS' (SANG) and 'Wehrmacht' (SAA)[http://www.dnipogo.org/fcs/comments/c424.htm] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:08, 28 November 2011 (CST)

== Blackburn from BHD ?? ==

Go see the Colt M4 section and the M4 series below it is said that Black burn holds M4 quite often. I would like to ask is this Blackburn any how related to Todd Blackburn from Black Hawk Down, the Ranger who fell from the Black Hawk chopper? - [[S9771773G]] 09:47, 20 November 2011 (GMT)

:I imagine it's just a coincidence, Blackburn is a "heroic" surname like Carver or Slater or whatever. I'd have thought if they were referencing Black Hawk Down they'd have named him after someone like Shughart or Gordon, really. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Doubt it. 'Battlefield 3' is unrelated to 'Black Hawk Down', plus, Todd Blackburn is Army Ranger while Henry Blackburn is Marine Recon. Proper analogy would be Patterson's from 'Medal of Honor' series. Both are in Army and [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/Jim_Patterson one] is actually the grandson of [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/James_Steven_Patterson another]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:19, 20 November 2011 (CST)
:'''P.S.''' Although, this would explain the appearance of Little Birds...

::There's also the fact that Todd Blackburn is a real person while Henry Blackburn is a fictional one. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:14, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:::True, there is even a page on [http://www.aweekendofheroes.com/vips/todd-blackburn.php Todd Blackburn]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:27, 21 November 2011 (CST)

::::From the link posted by Masterius: "In reality, it is not known why Blackburn lost his grip on the rope and is generally assumed that his inexperience led to his fall ('''However, Master Sergeant Matt Eversmann states that around the time when Blackburn fell, the UH60 canted slightly, and had to put his hand down to stay upright'''. The ranger that roped in after Blackburn also swears that he had grabbed the rope.) Additionally, the film incorrectly portrays Blackburn as a new arrival to Somalia, when in reality he had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company."
::::Um... why would Matt Eversmann have any trouble staying upright in said canting helicopter ''when he was in a Humvee on the ground''? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::[http://inquirer.philly.com/packages/somalia/nov16/default16.asp Because he was, in fact, in a Blackhawk?] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 15:00, 25 November 2011 (CST)
:::::'''P.S.''' ^ Oh, the age there is said to be 18, and "just months out of a Florida high school", instead of 20, and "had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company". So which of the descriptions is the correct one?

::::::They'd said on the DVD commentary as well as in the History Channel documentary about the raid that Eversmann was with the convoy the whole time. Guess they didn't have their facts straight. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)

:::::::He was the leader of Chalk Four as shown in the film and was inserted by Black Hawk, callsign Super 67. He didn't go to the crash site as shown in the film though, instead he was part of "The Lost Convoy" carrying the captured prisoners, think that is what you are thinking of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:36, 26 November 2011 (CST)

::::An interesting thing I found about Todd Blackburn was that he was born on October 25, the same date that BF3 was released, maybe that date was selected on purpose by DICE? [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 19:34, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Now this is intriguing... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:01, 3 December 2011 (CST)

I can tell you without any doubts that BF3 has several [[Generation Kill]] references. For example:

- The main protagonist is part of the 1st Reconnaissance Battalion.

- When driving towards Tehran in the humvees and complaining that they signed up for an ambush, the driver says "Frankly gentleman, I'm not hearing the aggression I'd like. Keep scanning". Which is a reference to the 5th episode "A Burning Dog" when the team leaders are preparing to clear out an ambush by a bridge.

- When Henry Blackburn and Co. drives in a convoy to capture Kaffarov the arms dealers. Matkovic, the guy wearing MultiCam OCP and the AT4, was sleeping on the convoy and when woken up he says "thirty four minutes... I've been asleep for thirty four minutes drinking a vanilla milkshake." Also a reference from the 5th episode A Burning Dog, when Ray Person wakes Brad Colbert to a team leader meeting, Brad responds "fifty six minutes. I've been asleep for fifty six minutes".

[[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:00, 20 November 2011 (CST)

:Not to mention the character named Chaffin. There's more, I'll have to play it again to find them all.-protoAuthor 23:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)

== M203 Dog tag ==

I was watching my new unlocked dog tags on Battlelog, and saw that the 40mm GL proficiency Dog tag has an M203 in the background.
Should it be added to the list of weapons appearing in the game?

http://battlelog-cdn.battlefield.com/public/profile/bf3/stats/dogtags/lb/dtb094.png?v=1628729

[[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Yes it should, like the SAA. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:29, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Yeah, though I would prefer these as full screenshots if possible (ie someone unlocking / viewing them), I never like pages full of different aspect ratios and weird tiny images. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:Well since we're mentioning weapons appearing on dog tags but not the actual game for usage, the USAS-12 proficiency dog tag has a SPAS-12 silhouette for some reason. It was probably directly ported from Bad Company 2 given how it looks. -- Long Fallen 17:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::Quite a number are, the SCAR-H is a SCAR-L. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)

::It actually peeves me that many of the assault rifle proficiency dog tags use the icons for the Bad Company 2 models, like most of the assault rifles equipped with grenade launchers. Especially the F2000 one, which isn't even possible to have an underslung grenade launcher, let alone the EGLM pictured on it. :P -- Long Fallen 21:05, 23 November 2011 (CST)

:::You'd be wrong about the F2000 not being able to take a grenade launcher.

:::[[Image:Fn f2000 3.jpg‎|thumb|none|500px|FN F2000 - 5.56x45mm NATO with [[FN EGLM|FN GL1]] - 40mm]]

:::[[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:38, 24 November 2011 (CST)

::::Ah, sorry, I should've made it clear that while the dog tag shows off the EGLM, you can't mount any kind of grenade launcher to the F2000 itself to use. -- Long Fallen 00:42, 25 November 2011 (CST)

:::::You mean ''in the game''. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:05, 26 November 2011 (CST)

== Going Rambo ==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMcM7OpC2dI&hd=1

Just how realistic is it? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:02, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:I think they should implement an overheating system for all the light machineguns. Just like in Battlefield 2. [[User:Santos|Santos]] 06:33, 30 November 2011 (CST)

::Barrel changes would be more interesting, I think. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:32, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:::And then there will be people complaining that Battlefield is becoming simulator. Rather odd, since magazine system and overheating system were part of the core Battlefield games since the beginning... Sigh, Bad Company... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:52, 1 December 2011 (CST)

== Back to Karkand ==

There's an expansion pack coming out in December, and it's going to have ten new guns and four new vehicles.

Here's a list of the weapons that I can absolutely confirm from seeing in the kill-feed in the trailers:

MG36 with a top rail instead of the carrying handle/optics

L85A2

QBZ-95B

QBU-88

FAMAS (Looks to be the Felin version)

There also looks to be some sort of Kalashnikov style weapon, but it's not shown clearly enough for me to recognize.

Here are the trailers if you feel like playing Where's Waldo:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=TyN_Zjw4l-s Overall Trailer]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjTmieRMKjo Karkand Trailer]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emGXp-qRrVg Oman Trailer]

Also of note, I have the PC version and just about all the weapons unlocked. I might upload screenshots if I get the chance.
--[[User:AchingScaphoid|AchingScaphoid]] 08:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:Unless they've got the screenshot feature working now, you'll need FRAPS to get screenshots. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:20, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:There are 2 AK variants in the first trailer you posted, I think the first is an [[AKM]], second is the same [[AKS-74U]] with the incorrect milled receiver as seen in the main game. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:37, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:The L85 is in the first trailer, although very briefly. 0.37, there's an L85. Old plastic handguard, RIS instead of the 19mm rail. No idea on the optic, other than it not being a SUSAT. --[[User:Spanner|Spanner]]

::I think it might be an Elcan of some sort but not sure. The newest modification to the L85A2 replaces the old rail with a MIL-STD-1913 rail and is fitted with an Elcan Spectre with a piggybacked CCO. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:08, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:::I've also seen real L85s with ACOGs, so using that could be authentic for optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:13, 29 November 2011 (CST)

::::An ACOG on a MIL-STD-1913 would be incorrect though. British ACOGs have a proprietary mount for the original 19mm rail. Any gun that is fitted with the new rail will be using the ELCAN. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:::::Indeed:
:::::[http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/files/BEMIL069/upload/2008/02/2_acog.jpg L85A2 with ACOG on mount]
:::::[http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee252/TarnishUK/SpecterOS4x.jpg L85A2 with Specter on rail]
:::::--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:41, 1 December 2011 (CST)

I added them to the page, feel free to expand them. This picture was on the Blog a few weeks back, it shows all 10 weapons:

http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg

[[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)

:List of all weapons and attachments in BtK expansion:

:http://mp1st.com/2011/11/30/the-complete-list-of-bf3-back-to-karkand-weapons-and-attachments-revealed/

:--[[User:Wikinerd|Wikinerd]] 09:04, 30 November 2011 (CST)

::Really, the best they could manage was photos of someone's TV? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)

:I'm not too sure what to think of the Pancor Jackhammer being in this game, I mean, we've already got the USAS-12 as the automatic shotgun, if they wanted to add in another one, they could've just added in the AA-12. Anyone kinda with me on this? - Long Fallen 14:20, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::Not a fan of automatic shotguns anyway, since they, technically, overshadow the semi-automatic ones (because of selective fire). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)

:::The USAS-12 has competition with the Jackhammer, I haven't unlocked it yet but I remember picking up a kit with the Jackhammer and it was like using a slightly lower capacity DAO-12 with it's 6+1 rounds but with automatic fire rate. This video shows some gameplay, extended mags give it 13+1 magazine capacity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q95ICdl9fsE&feature=related It's apparently "slower than the USAS" from what little experience I've had with it and from people I've asked about it [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)

== MG36 ==
I know that there were only 100 or so MG36s made, but isn't a standard G36 with a bipod foregrip and a double drum mag exactly the same thing? I get that if there's one in a movie it will actually be a G36 with bipod and drum added, but in a game can't it be called an MG36 since it didn't start as something else? Also, it IS an MG, not an AR, unless the RPK, M27, and QBB-95 are ARs too. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:An MG36 has a bipod handguard, C-mag, ''and'' a heavy barrel and reinforced action. This, like basically every other MG36 that has appeared in anything, is based on a standard G36 with a bipod and drum, as the Bundrswehr use. I don't think there's even a specific name for the configuration, but it is ''not'' called MG36. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)
::Oh okay, but would the heavy barrel look any different externally? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:11, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:::I believe it's mostly internal. However, IIRC the MG36 was rejected the same year the MIL-STD-1913 standard was drawn up, so an "MG36" with a flat-top rail would have to be a G36 or an after the fact modification of an MG36, and speculating a gun that isn't real ''must'' be modified is trying a little too hard to cover up a simple naming error. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 20:15, 30 November 2011 (CST)
::::Oh okay, well, if it had the standard carry handle I'd say it should be "MG36", but seeing as it has the "C" one, it's a G36 with a bipod, C-Mag, and G36C rail. To be fair though, MG36 is a ''lot'' easier for the sake of the game. On DICE's part I mean. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:10, 30 November 2011 (CST)
:::::Alex - According to G3Kurz on HKpro, the barrel OD is 30% thicker. http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk-long-gun-talk/94949-wtk-mg36-barrel-question.html Evil Tim - Where did you hear that it had reinforced action? --[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 22:44, 30 November 2011 (CST)

== "Kaffarov" ==

So, is this mission always buggy as hell, or did I just have a bad run screencapping it? As well as that weirdness with the Barrett I had guns inheriting the texture of the floor they were on top of (I have a lovely image of a linoleum QJY-88), some pictures of MP7s with their magazine against their front grip and their stock hovering in front of them at ninety degrees to the gun and every single USAS-12 in the level appearing on the ground with no magazine. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:That always seems to happen with USASs and MP7s, but please, please add the linoleum QJY-88 to the main page, just for laughs :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)

::Also, I really didn't get the last level. Why would you hijack a train that was already going to where you want to go (thus drawing attention to yourself for no good reason), then randomly rig it to explode even though you've already got a nuke on board? And why was one man with a detonator standing in the same room as the explosives that detonator set off? And how did Blackburn know that trigger would set off the random bombs and not the nuke? I have questions, dammit. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:54, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:::You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:::This is my explanation and I know there's several holes in it but bear with me, it makes slightly more sense than just a lack of general explanation. The hijacking of the train was probably a distraction whereby once they got off their intended stop with the nuke, they would send it hurtling somewhere else for the police and other emergency services to follow. This would have then given them an opportunity to get the nuke to Times Square undetected while the emergency services scrambled to stop the train wired with explosives. In terms of the detonator, the guy was probably the patsy to serve as a suicide bomber-type to ensure the distraction seemed like the real deal and to lay blame once again on the PLR rather than Solomon. Blackburn knew that the trigger wouldn't set off the nuke because nukes require specialised arming devices if I'm not mistaken and you can't use a normal detonator to blow it up. Just my explanation of the events. Feel free to lay waste to my over-active imagination that came up with this somewhat cockamamie fill-in to explain the plotholes in the last mission. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:25, 7 December 2011 (CST)
::::The thing is the train was already ''going'' to Times Square, and detonating a nuke underground would create a sinkhole a large chunk of lower Manhattan would fall into; if anything it would be even worse than detonating it on the surface. Solomon could have just sat there alone with the thing in his lap on a timer or dead man's switch, the only purpose the hijacking ultimately served was to draw attention to the fact that something was up.

::::Then again, this story also had my very favourite, the framing device of the protagonist describing the action. I always smile when I imagine how it's going during the actual level. "So then I ducked into cover. Looked up but didn't shoot. Reloaded. Aimed down my sights. Saw a guy ducking out so I fire twice and reloaded and then..." "Weren't we supposed to be on a time limit?" "One Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Seventh Amendment." "Ah, yes, the right to defence in the form of an average-length modern video game." [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:47, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Correct, the train was going to Times Square but perhaps it was not the last station? I'm not sure how the trains work in New York because I don't personally live there but it's possible that Times Square was a station on a longer line of stations where Solomon could have sent the police, ESU, FBI, Homeland Security and whatever government agencies to follow the train rigged with explosives. Creating a sinkhole does seem like a better idea but I think the purpose of blowing it in Times Square itself above ground was to send a message. The mushroom cloud that would be better seen from above ground would strike more fear, in my opinion but hey, that's just my two cents.

:::::In terms of the framing device, I have to agree with the utter ridiculousness of the idea of Blackburn describing the action he performed when recalling every single detail from the playable level but it's far more plausible than Black Ops. Thinking of how Mason could describe every single detail of his action movie experience as well as the experience of the SR-71 Blackbird pilot just made my brain stop completely. Especially when he was extremely doped up and possibly tortured judging by the bloodstains on various parts of his clothing. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:59, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::::::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca4D0-s8OsI&feature=related Believe me, an underground nuclear detonation is hard to mistake for anything else]. As for Blops, I always had the image of the guys questioning him picking up the bottle of truth serum and checking the expiry date when he started with the G11s and WA2000s. Or the whole THE NUMBERS thing just ending up with him forgetting his wife's birthday. "No! Reznov said it was tommorrow!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:11, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::Holy wow. I know that's destructive and it's horrible to say this but that is indeed impressive. My sentiments exactly. However, they probably just went meh because they (as in the interrogators who were CIA) were probably using LSD as a truth serum as well as a mind control drug at the time. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 05:46, 7 December 2011 (CST)

== Question ==

I just got this game (yay! I absolutely love it, even the singleplayer) and I was gonna get screenshots but I heard I need FRAPS. What is FRAPS and how do I get it? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:34, 1 December 2011 (CST)

:It is a program that can record gameplays and you can also take screenshots with a hotkey if it is running in the background. It has a freeware version. I think in the free version it can only save images in BMP, but u can convert them easily. Get if from here: www.fraps.com. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 00:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)

::The free version watermarks videos, not sure if it does the same with screenshots. You're best off saving in BMP since the JPEG captures are pretty abysmal quality with lots of artifacting. Give me a few days first, though, I have fifteen hundred images of the singleplayer I need to sort through. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:29, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:::I just need screenshots and I have Photoshop CS4. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)

::::Then yeah, http://www.fraps.com/ to download the free version. Wikipedia says it doesn't watermark screenshots even on the free version, just be sure you have plenty of HD space since a 1920x1080 BMP weighs 3-6 megabytes. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:05, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::596 GB. :B - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:49, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::: I currently use FRAPS myself. It does not watermark screenshots. Haven't tried getting videos yet. Anyways, the race is on to see who can put up pictures first.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 14:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)

I will be uploading a lot of great screenshots for the page tomorrow, should I add pics of the iron sights or just ones of interest? (ie, misaligned sights, the M9's correct sights, the MEU's tritium sights, etc.) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:45, 8 December 2011 (CST)

:Actually, I'm in favour of having ironsight pictures on all video game pages, since they're so often missaligned, or out of scale, as a lot of what we do here is point out flaws and educate (hopefully) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:06, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::Yay, more work. I need more weight to this. :| - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 02:22, 8 December 2011 (CST)

::Iron sights are fine as long as they're reasonably interesting and the article doesn't have too many weapons; this one should be ok. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:30, 8 December 2011 (CST)

== My God ==

I am so glad with battlefield 3 and mainly dice the are actually listening to the community and something even better they are fixing incorrect guns.

Ex:

Tweaked the AN94 so its burst fire better conveys the real world advantage offered by this weapon.

Added Single Shot to the AN94 as an available fire mode.

Slightly increased the recoil on the M416 and removed the Burst Fire mode (this weapon incorrectly had burst fire, which was not authentic).

from latest patch --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 19:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:Cool! =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)

:Oh! But HK416 is still called M416? :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:13, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::Wait, really? they removed burst from the 416 and added semi to the 94? Wow, cool! Those were the only fire mode errors too :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:02, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::Well, aside from not being able to fire the spotting rifle on the SMAW. I still think it would be amusing to be able to shoot people with your 9mm tracer that shoots like a rocket. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::What? Oh, looked it up: "Each round consists of a special 9mm tracer bullet, crimped into a 7.62x51mm NATO casing with a .22 Hornet blank cartridge for propellant". That is the most WTF round I've ever heard of :O [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 13:41, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::Alex, I don't suppose you could share the link with anyone reading this page? :) -- Long Fallen 14:17, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::::Oh right :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder-launched_Multipurpose_Assault_Weapon [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:58, 3 December 2011 (CST)

:::::::I found a more detailed look at the round here: http://cartridgecollectors.org/cmo/cmo05oct.htm [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 16:49, 3 December 2011 (CST)

::::::::I wonder if they're going to fix the "SVD" as well [[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:01, 4 December 2011 (CST)

:Is that just for PC? 'Cause I'm on the PS3 and the HK416 still has a burst mode and the AN-94 still doesn't have semi-auto as a fire mode. Or is this for the campaign? I haven't played the campaign again in a while. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:28, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::With the new patch that came out for the upcoming DLC, Back to Karkand. The AN-94 got the single-shot fire-mode and the HK416 got the burst-fire mode removed. Confirmed on the PC [[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

::On the PS3 here, AN-94 still has the automatic/burst selection as before; no semiautomatic fire. The HK416 also still has semi/burst/fire selection. - Long Fallen 23:18, 9 December 2011 (CST)

:::Xbox still has the old AN 94 and M416 fire modes. Also if you use the AN 94 with iron sights and swap back and forth between your pistol, the front sight disappears on the Xbox. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:30, 20 December 2011 (CST)

::::That change is in the next patch we're supposed to get, it takes longer for consoles. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:54, 20 December 2011 (CST)

Any idea of when that is? I just started using the AN 94 and love the two round burst but I'm hindered at long range because of the recoil and rate of fire.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:05, 26 December 2011 (CST)

:No idea, it has to go through certification from MS/Sony and usually takes 2-3 weeks. Ish. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:51, 26 December 2011 (CST)

== Changing Descriptions in screenshots. ==

If you take the screenshot, go ahead and put whatever you want in there. But if you're going to edit my words, do so only if there is a typo, misspell, incorrect information or bad grammar. Seriously, if you want to put your own words so badly, put your own damn screenshots up.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 00:58, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:Your screenshot descriptions read like a filing cabinet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:40, 5 December 2011 (CST)
Then like I said previously, put up your own damn screenshots--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 13:20, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:This is a wiki. The point of a wiki is collaborative editing. As stated in the [[Rules,_Standards_and_Principles#IMFDB_is_an_information_resource.2C_not_our_private_playground | Rules, Standards and Principles]], ''"IMFDB is an information resource, not our private playground."'' --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 13:48, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:And besides, if you take a look at the bottom of the edit window, you'll see it reads: '''If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.''' So... yeah. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:If you're going to get this precious about your screenshots, then don't bother uploading them at all. While IMFDB does have a certain unwritten concept of "uploader's privilege" it does not extend to captions that sound like they were sent in Morse code and don't match the way the other captions already on the page are written and formatted. Also, lose the attitude or you'll be getting some time out. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:50, 5 December 2011 (CST)
::Unless the map or game mode is important to the image, which it usually is not, it should be left out. As for the rest of your captions, I have no problem with what you put, just the map/gamemode doesn't belong here. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:38, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:Fine fine. I didn't know you were an admin so don't ban me just to prove you can. Sorry if I sounded a little terse, but it is annoying having your words re-written constantly. But just one last thing, cause I noticed you mass changed my changes back to what you had, would you mind changing "the player character" to the class? Such as "The US/Russian Engineer in Multiplayer holds the A-91"? (i'll put that screenshot up in a bit)--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:10, 5 December 2011 (CST)
::I mainly do that because the character has no name in multi, it's much easier in single where you can do "Blackburn holds an X." "An engineer holds an X" seems a little awkward in terms of sentence structure; it feels oddly unspecific about the character holding the weapon being the one the player is controlling. I mainly make a deal of saying "the player character holds..." because it annoys me when people say "the player holds..." since the player is either holding a control pad or a mouse. Typically if the player is holding a gun something has gone very badly wrong somewhere along the line. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:28, 6 December 2011 (CST)

::[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] is admin since October 2011, so keep that in mind. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:07, 6 December 2011 (CST)

:::I didn't know that, congrats! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:17, 6 December 2011 (CST)

::I just think that it sounds better than just saying "the player character" because it is just extremely generic. That's why I usually just put "weapon with extra extra extra attatched" without putting player character, cause it's obvious there is a player character holding the weapon. And you don't want people to be holding guns in real life? Tsk Tsk. What kinda firearm wiki admin are you? And relating to that, is there a list of site Admins available? Is it in the forum? Cause I know there's at least 5 of you guys floating around here (plus Bunni, but I have never actually seen him post or discuss something in the main wiki) and it'd be nice to know who they are. --[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 10:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

:::[[Imfdb :. guns in movies :. movie guns :. the internet movie firearms database:Administrators|There you go]]. Overly long page title BTW. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:29, 7 December 2011 (CST)

As long as you don't edit my post about the PP2000 doing as much damage and throwing pebbles at someones face, that's my gem right there. :p (not like there's anything I can do about if it does get edited) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 13:24, 10 December 2011 (CST)

:I won't change it. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 10 December 2011 (CST)

== Knife used by Dmitri ==

Does anyone know what kind of knife was used by Dmitri in the mission "Comrades"? Its the one he uses to cut the wires in the garage to unlock the gates. It looks ... funky and not very utilitarian--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:06, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:It's a Spetsnaz machete. [http://www.sovietarmystuff.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1160] --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 21:25, 5 December 2011 (CST)
:A more in-depth look here: http://interestingswords.com/machete/russian-machete-taiga.html [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 17:10, 8 December 2011 (CST)

== Furthering the US Army / USMC mix theory ==

IRL USMC use neither [[M26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System|M26 MASS]] nor [[Heckler & Koch M320|M320 GLM]]. Army does. USMC still use [[M203 grenade launcher|M203 GL]] as UGL. As for hand-held grenade launcher... [[Milkor MGL#MGL 140|M32 MGL]]. Spammy for MP but would have worked for SP (like [[Barrett M82#Barrett M107|M107 LRSR]] did). Thoughts shared. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:40, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:Well yeah, and they also don't use the M1A2 Abrams. This seems to be in some nebulous future where the USMC has upgraded all their equipment. Also the M107 was actually pretty stupid since all you did with it was shoot some guys on the other side of a courtyard with a non-magnifying scope. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:44, 9 December 2011 (CST)

::Gotta say, upgrading equipment in the future one 'A' more doesn't seem as excessive as with entirely new one... But yeah, it's still upgrade. Like, say, giving the future US Army the USMC [[Beretta 92 pistol series#Beretta M9A1|M9A1]].
::Heh, that's the wrong mission they put M107 in. Is there any USMC mission where the long range capabilities of M107 would have served better? (Here I'm starting to think of those sniper missions in '''CoD 4''' and '''MoH''') --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:12, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:::I think the best mission to have the M107 in would have been "Rock and a Hard Place," there's a lot of range in that valley. Perhaps even let you pick off officers directing things at the rear so fewer vehicles would show up. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:38, 9 December 2011 (CST)
::::In Operation Swordbreaker I sorta hoped you'd get a chance for some M107 urban action from a sniper point, taking out PLR Insurgents from afar. I'd thought big anti-material plus big city with lots of cover, be a perfect role for an Anti-Material sniper, alas it was used against you rather than use from you. Instead you just got a Mk. 11. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 11:14, 9 December 2011 (CST)
:::::Yeah, I was sad the M107 wasn't put to better use, it's the only time it appears in the ENTIRE game. The only I thing I didn't like in the SP. :( - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 16:31, 9 December 2011 (CST)

http://www.battlefield.com/images/bf3-hooah :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:02, 13 December 2011 (CST)

== Just some silliness ==

I didn't feel like uploading tons of screens for the page today so I'll put these up just for fun.
[[Image:BF3-Falcon Kick!.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Falcon Kick!''']]
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Damn, those alien bastards are gonna pay for shooting up my ride.''']]
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''I'm gonna kick your ass, bitch!''']]
- [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:00, 10 December 2011 (CST)

:Would be cool if the kick could actually have been used as a combat move like in '''F.E.A.R.''' or '''Mirror's Edge''' (also made by EA DICE) :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:42, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:More pictures with included silliness are always welcome to me :D If we could make pictures with captions as hilarious as the ones on the Far Cry 2 page, I would always come to the BF3 page whenever I'm in a bad mood xD -- Long Fallen 22:11, 11 December 2011 (CST)

::Yeah, the Far Cry 2 page is the best page ever created! :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:46, 12 December 2011 (CST)

::Wait, how do you kick? [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:37, 11 December 2011 (CST)

::You can't kick, this animation only happens when your character vaults over a low lying object, like a guardrail or a rock. -- Long Fallen 22:44, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:::Dammit. I am disappoint. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:46, 11 December 2011 (CST)

== Current Page Status / More Images ==

It's amazed me how long the game's been out yet there's still not very many images of all the weapons :/

I've unlocked all the multiplayer weapons, but unfortunately don't have a capture card for my PS3, which I think is moot since most of the current images look like they were taken on the PC's level of detail.

As of right now I love the current format the MP7's listing is in, showing off the accessories it can mount at one time, while also showing off each part of the reload animation. It would also be nice if each listing had the weapon's simple ironsights as the first image, or vice versa.

Either way, we need to make this image complete :D A game like this doesn't deserve to have such a barren imfdb page... -- Long Fallen 22:40, 11 December 2011 (CST)

:It's because the game's too fun to take the time to do it ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:43, 12 December 2011 (CST)

== HK53 ==

Is it only on the 360 version where the HK53 is, for some reason, referred to as the G53? And for some reason it comes standard with a 12x ballistic scope. It's quite amusing, the scope is as long as the gun. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 03:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:It's called G53 on PC as well. [[User:Ramell|Ramell]]
::I think the 12x is a bugged accessory, that's usually only available on those weapons for DICE Employees [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:01, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:::HK53 on PS3, hence that screenshot. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)
::::I had assumed that DICE didn't get the rights to use "HK" because in the description for all other HK guns they are referred to as "made by a German weapons manufacturer". Strange that PS3 uses the "HK".--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 12:44, 18 December 2011 (CST)
:12x Ballistic Scope? Can you take a screenshot and post it here? :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::lol sorry, I don't know the first thing about taking screenshots. I'm sure someone else here could get a screenshot. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::All the BTK guns have the DICE-only attachments unlocked by default, that is to say, all the ones you're never supposed to get. If you want screen shots I'd get them in the next month or less as they'll probly get rid of them in the next patch. 12x Scope: FAMAS, L85A2, HK53, QBZ-95B, QBB-95, MG36. Flash Suppressor: QBU-88, L96. Suppressor: Jackhammer. Note that for the Jackhammer the suppressor doesn't appear on the model in first or third person, the stats don't change, and I'm pretty sure the sound doesn't either, so really, it doesn't exist. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 10:04, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:::DICE-only? Cheating Campers >:O
:::HK53 and QBZ-95B with ballistic scope - would be funny to see :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 17 December 2011 (CST)

== "Realistic" ==

Does it annoy the hell out of anyone else when people talk about how "realistic" BF3 is, specifically compared to MW3? Yes, DICE did a much better job on the modeling and it does have a more realistic ballistics engine, but come on. Every soldier carries around an infinitely reusable parachute? People run around with defibrillators to instantly revive teammates? Somehow the Support class fits an infinite amount of ammo for every caliber in his pocket? Then, of course, every single soldier is trained to use every jet, helicopter and tank, and the jets can be used as taxis with wing mounted seating. Don't get me wrong, these are all things that add to the enjoyment of the game, and they work really well as game mechanics, but not even remotely realistic. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 06:22, 15 December 2011 (CST)
:They call it realistic because using the word "verisimilitude" makes people think you're trying to look clever for the sake of it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:27, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:Yeah, some aspects of the game are unrealistic, but think about it though. Would you really want to play a game where you run out of ammo ever 5 minutes and have to run around and just wait to die or hope you knife someone to take his weapons, and then hope he too hasn't run out of ammo? Or would you want to have to go through a Gran Turismo-esque license course to be able to use every vehicle properly? While some things are clearly over-the-top, I won't argue with that, some things are obviously put in for the gameplay value, for enjoyment. IF the developers truly wanted a realistic game, they'd have the disc eject and destroy itself after you die. Though the defibrillator comment reminded me of something my friend said, "Oh, you come back to life after getting hit directly with a tank shell! Oh here, let me revive this oatmeal!" [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:49, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:Googling "Battlefield 3 is too realistic" and getting matching results is kinda funny. For some interesting comparisons: [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FacklerScaleOfFPSRealism Fackler Scale of FPS Realism] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:28, 15 December 2011 (CST)

::As an airsofter I find it that list really funny. Classic: All FPSs / Realistic: Airsoft :D Seriously though, what I look for when I think realism is things that work how they do in real life, how they have to work, not whether they normally are or should be used in that way. BF3 is rare in that it has the following: Tac and normal reloads all done right, one in the chamber, iron sights and optics lined up/used properly, all fire modes that should be on any weapon present, switching modes does not change the gun's stats (ie switching to semi makes gun more powerful) just the mode, damage (which can never be considered fully realistic) at a reasonable level and based on the calibre, bullet travel time and drop. Now, whether the Marines have the right weapons, vehicles, or camo, and stuff like that comes second to me, because even if they don't use a certain camo, they ''could'' as opposed to one in the chamber, which '''has''' to funtion like that. Russian soldiers don't use, say SG 553s, QJY-88s, or Jackhammers, but they could, and more importantly I can, because first and foremost in mulitplayer I'm me. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 09:58, 15 December 2011 (CST)

:::Well, things like single reload animation, no +1 round in the chamber, fixed firing mode, hitscan, etc. are usually the result of engine limitations. In this regard we can see that [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite-2 Frostbite 2 Engine] is more advanced than [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite Frostbite 1 Engine] (which already had bullet physics; although magcount and overheating from [http://www.moddb.com/engines/refractor-2 Refractor 2 Engine] are absent; it would have also been nice if there were interchangeable magazines). Regarding the equipment it shows how much there [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DidNotDoTheResearch didn't do the research] and [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShownTheirWork shown their work]. Me wants [[Project Reality]] for BF3 :| --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:02, 17 December 2011 (CST)

:I'm not saying that it isn't realistic in some specific areas, sure it is, but it's a video game, and to compare it to COD and say BF is more realistic is kind of like comparing Star Trek to Star Wars and saying Star Trek is more realistic because they used the word "tachyon". That being said, I think all four examples I just used are very evertaining. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 04:56, 16 December 2011 (CST)

== Javelins are the best. ==

Javelin + CITV station on a tank = fantastic combination. The top down fire mode makes killing LAVs and Amtraks, especially on Noshair (sp?) Canals easy, not to mention the massively amusing ability to fire on laser painted aircraft. It's always hilarious to watch an FA/18 blow up and the guy flying just sees FGM-148 Javelin killed him and he wonders what just happened. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 02:22, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:Oh my, sounds like tracer darting in BC2 o_O --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:56, 18 December 2011 (CST)

::And CITV Station + MBT Guided Shells! Lock, fire, triple kill on one Little Bird! Lock, fire, quad on the other. I was 7/0 20 seconds into the game! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:14, 18 December 2011 (CST)

:::It's even better against a jet. I just try to imagine the expression on a pilot's face as he wonders how the hell an Abrams just shot down his Flanker. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)

:The Javelins may be the best, however, setting up the SOFLAM is akin to setting yourself up with giant neon lights pointing "I'M RIGHT HERE!" to the enemies. I'm sure DICE had good intentions when programming it so that it wouldn't be ridiculously common and spammy, but it just sort of defeats the point of giving it to the stealthy ninja that the Recon class should be. Not to mention it gets even less useful on Wake Island with the mobile AA guns shooting the bright red light visible from just about any distance with the fury of a thousand angry Russians armed with PPSh's. :/ -- Long Fallen 22:32, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::Oh, the Tunguska, which has the ability of firing every bullet ever made at the same time?[[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)

::Haha, is there any other? -- Long Fallen 01:26, 20 December 2011 (CST)

== 9K22 Tunguska ==

I've actually just realized that while the page is mostly (half) complete, the 9K22 Tunguska's armaments haven't been added to the page; because I'd like to know exactly how much ammunition for its guns it carries and approximately for how long would it waste it all before running out, since it's a mobile AA platform? -- Long Fallen 01:36, 20 December 2011 (CST)
:Ammunition capacity is 1,904, combined rate of fire is variable between 3,900 and 5,000 rounds per minute, so if we take the lower rate of fire this works out to about 30 seconds of continuous firing. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:45, 20 December 2011 (CST)

::[[Image:2a38m.jpg|thumb|none|400px|2A38M Autocannon - 30x165mm]]
::Example image in case anyone feels like adding. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:36, 22 December 2011 (CST)

== Added a piece of info about the M1014 ==

It's really inaccurate for even a shotgun. I've patterned my shotgun in real life which also has a cylinder bore and the pattern was half the size of the pattern in game. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:46, 20 December 2011 (CST)

:This "short-range shotgun" problem is sadly common in video games, to the point which the TVTropes website has a page just for it. And Frag-12 rounds for the shotguns in this game are horribly overpowered too. I'd take a tighter pattern with a realistic damage-drop-off with distance with buckshot if they could tone down the Frag-12 rounds. For a more realistic shotgun, try playing SWAT 4. You can actually snipe somewhat well with a Benelli Nova in that game if you crouch and wait to become fully accurate.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 20:55, 21 December 2011 (CST)

:SWAT4... It's the same game that also has handgun sniping and guns that do less damage at point blank range. I was disappointed with the 1911 in that game sadly. :( I'd be careful advising anyone to play that game; its mechanics are ungodly finicky. -- Long Fallen 22:23, 21 December 2011 (CST)

::You could snipe with handguns in Battlefield 2 too... That was actually a tactic employed by experienced BF2 snipers: shoot the enemy with bolt-action sniper rifle and then immediately switch to pistol and finish him off ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:20, 22 December 2011 (CST)

:Meh, SWAT 4 isn't as finicky with its mechanics if you know what you're doing. The damage with its guns is somewhat random to reflect how bullets in real life don't always perform as expected (i.e., JHPs clog with clothing and fail to expand, 5.56mm FMJ fails to fragment once inside a target if the bullet isn't properly constructed or the barrel it's fired from is too short, etc.). though I will admit that the M1911 and other .45 ACP guns are underpowered in that game. But I think the reason as to why "handgun sniping" has persisted up until now is that modelling ballistic physics for bullets en masse was only possible when the right programming and hardware appeared. The BF2 example was probably implemented as well given the limited draw distance of the engine; without an omnipresent zoom system to represent how your eyes can focus on far-off objects (like in ARMA 2) the limitations of pixels on our monitors means that enemies become unrecognizable jumbles of pixels at distances we would still be able to clearly see them in real life. Also, because adjustable sights are hard to model in games (as opposed to scopes with ballistic drop markings), pistols often don't have ballistic drop either. I tried compensating for ballistic drop while shooting pistols in the STALKER series--because the iron sights on pistols can't be adjusted it's very difficult, since essentially the muzzle will obscure your target when you aim high to compensate.

:But the sooner we get realistic shotgun buckshot spreads and ranges in games, the better. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 14:02, 22 December 2011 (CST)

::The problem is, the zoom system only activates when you press a button. So any time you don't, the environment is presented in its distant form. This gives an edge to the person who secured a position and now zooms in in the enemy direction, while the enemy is on the move and can't see said person. In reality, they should see each other evenly. I like this absence of bionic eyes in [[Project Reality]]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:26, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:So you have to hold down the button in ARMA2 to focus on distant objects? Well, a toggle system would be much better (probably combined with using a "dynamic zoom" system that used your mouse wheel or two keys to zoom in and out so you could vary the amount of zoom much like your eyes can focus across a great deal of ranges). Still, given the pixellation problem that I mentioned earlier, all PCs in Project Reality have to carry binoculars so as to focus on distant targets, but these cannot be combined with weaponry, so if you're using a kit that has no optics for your gun and are trying to hit something that you can't really see unmagnified (even though in real life you would be able to see and hit a target at that distance), tough luck. Project Reality is also going in the process of making a version based on the ARMA2 engine as well. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 18:17, 23 December 2011 (CST)

::Adjustable Zoom would be nice. Sadly, developers haven't yet caught the idea. Even adjustable FOV is not in every modern shooter (and where it is, it might be limited).
::It works both ways in PR: you have problems seeing an enemy in the distance and an enemy has problems seeing you ;) And yes, I'm aware of PR for ArmA II. [http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-reality-arma2 It's currently v0.1], right at the starting line. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:47, 24 December 2011 (CST)

== M1014 magazine tube length ==

Can someone explain to me what's going on with the magazine tube length of the M1014 in-game? The weapon art models show the typical length, but in-game, the magazine length looks like a M3. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 13:12, 27 December 2011 (CST)

The pump action shotguns in the game start with four round mag tubes. Therefore the art models depict them as such. However, when you unlock "Extended Magazines", the in world model changes to the six round tube for both the Remington and the Benelli.--[[User:GLOCK10mil|GLOCK10mil]] 16:18, 27 December 2011 (CST)

:Didn't think of that. Thank you. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 17:03, 27 December 2011 (CST)

== UMP trigger group ==

It seems the world model for the H&K UMP has safe, semi-auto, and full auto, even though the in-game weapon operates with a selectable 2-round burst.--[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 14:53, 28 December 2011 (CST)
:If that's true than it is an error, though the UMP ''can'' have a full/2/semi/safe trigger group. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:32, 28 December 2011 (CST)

== Back To Karkand Weapons ==

So I've been playing B2K a lot, and I've gathered a bunch of trivia about some of the guns that could be added to the page, but I'm not so knowledgable about them so I thought I'd leave them here so someone who knows more can add them into the page.

The L85A2 has three round burst as well as auto and semi, which as far as I know it doesn't in real life. It also can't mount the M320 which, again as far as I know, is the grenade launcher it mounts in real life. It's also 'cocked' by pressing a bolt release just above the magwell.

The FAMAS also has burst as well as semi and auto, again I don't know if this is true in real life.

Both the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B and burst as well as automatic and semi, but I'll admit I know nothing about these weapons. The QBZ-95B and the QBU-88 are reloaded similarly to the AN94/AEK-971 (new mag is used to push the mag release and then inserted) and it looks absolutely bizarre in first person because they're bullpup.

Also, the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B are chambered in 5.45x39mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm and the QBU-88 is chambered in 7.62x54mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm.

That's all I've got [[User:Nikonov|Nikonov]] 18:17, 9 January 2012 (CST)

:The FAMAS does have all three, and a lot of the info screens are wrong or somewhat wrong, pretty sure they're just copy-pasting errors as opposed to them not knowing the calibre. Everything else you said is correct as far as I know. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:34, 9 January 2012 (CST)

::Well, if they are copy-pasting errors then someone should tweet Demize about it ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:10, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::The reload animation for those Chinese rifles doesn't use the magazine to push the old mag out. The character pulls out a new mag and pulls the old one out with just his fingers but has the magazine in hand to load into the gun right after. I saw a video of it with an AK once.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:49, 9 January 2012 (CST)

::I'm assuming DICE watched this video, I don't have a clue if this is what they teach in the PLA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMmaIZ8Umnk--[[User:Mattatack92|Mattatack92]] 00:40, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:IRL L85A2 mounts not [http://www.hk-usa.com/-images/products/m320/lg_m320_3.jpg M320] but a different variant of AG36, called [http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v470/Black_Hawk_169/DSC00005.jpg UGL]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:07, 10 January 2012 (CST)

::I just Tweeted Demize about the calibre and ROFs being sometimes wrong for the BTK guns. :) Also, he says he's not going to add the HK79 and GL1 due to memory issues, which is fair. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:16, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:::That would make a nice "GL Pack" DLC though: GL1, HK79, M203, UGL... And more, should the carbines get corresponding rifle variants :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:20, 11 January 2012 (CST)

Also interesting, the QBZ-95's ironsights glitch when you fire. Actually helps. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:23, 10 January 2012 (CST)

I don't have a Twitter, could someone suggest something small on the HUD on hardcore modes that show what fire mode your gun is set to? I change it a lot and the guns with three settings make it difficult.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:43, 10 January 2012 (CST)

:I agree, and Tweeted :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:56, 11 January 2012 (CST)
::Would be kind of cool if in hardcore mode you could actually look down at your weapon and see the fire selector or check how many rounds are in the magazine. If you think having no HUD is "hardcore," just imagine having to actually worry about taking your eyes off the battleground long enough to check on your weapon like that. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:14, 22 January 2012 (CST)

== Pancor Jackhammer ==

Why? Not only is this weapon relatively pointless since they included the USAS-12 (it seems to recoil less and that's about it) but it comes with a freaking suppressor. Of all the useless devices you can equip to a weapon as insanely loud as the Jackhammer theoretically would be, this and an under-barrel can opener would just about top the list. (I presume they put it on there because the revolving magazine system of the Jackhammer has some similarities to that of a Nagant M1895.) Also, why in the hell is the freaking thing even in the game? There's supposedly a grand total of two of the dumb things in existence. If we're going to throw in an automatic shotgun prototype that never made it into production, how about the H&K CAWS? That one was actually tested by the US military. In another world, it could have been adopted. Or, hell, the Atchisson AA-12. Don't get me wrong, the Jackhammer is a cool looking gun, but it never made it off the design bench and I'm a ''little'' tired of seeing it crop up in video games claiming at least some level of real world veracity (the world "realistic" is a silly one to use for FPS games). [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:24, 22 January 2012 (CST)
:It's supposed to be for the nostalgia, I guess, since it was an unlockable in BF2. Much like them keeping that "DAO-12" name for the Protecta, though it's now a Street Sweeper. There were actually quite a few Jackhammer prototypes, but only two that fired fullauto. Or rather didn't, which is why there were only two. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:38, 22 January 2012 (CST)

:They will put XM8 as military tested weapon, methinks. CAWS was pretty cool gun in [[Jagged Alliance 2]] :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:52, 22 January 2012 (CST)

::As stated, it's in because it was in BF2, that's the point of the Back To Karkand pack. Also, it doesn't actually have a suppressor. Well, it does, but it's invisible and does not change any stats whatsoever, not even making you not appear on the minimap. So, there's just a pretend option for a suppressor. Why? Same reason the two ARs, two Carbines, and two MGs have 12x scopes, and the two Sniper Rifles have Flash Suppressors: it was an oversight, those are the attachments you're supposed to ''never'' get those attachments, only DICE gets them, because they're silly. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:10, 22 January 2012 (CST)

Well the suppressor actually does do something, it cuts damage down. I actually like the Pancor though, with frag rounds, ext mags, and a Holo sight I can clear out most hallways on metro. But, that is pretty much the only map it is of any use on.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 16:47, 22 January 2012 (CST)

:::Oh geez, way for me to miss the obvious. I forgot about it being in BF2, having not played the "older" games in quite a while. (Why does 2005 seem so long ago?) Actually, I was a little sad that B2K didn't include the option to hijack semi-trucks and civilian cars like you could with the Armored Fury booster pack. At least you can borrow a Bobcat on Wake Island and try to run enemy soldiers down with it for nothing other than sheer comedy value... And the other "weird" attachments (okay, maybe not the flash suppressor) are at least ''sort of'' useful. You can be extremely annoying with the MG36 fitted with a 12x - no sniper likes dodging nearly-accurate long range machine gun fire, and anything that snipers don't like is fine with me. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 04:26, 4 February 2012 (CST)

== Dog Tag Weapons ==
I vote we add a section either at the bottom of the page for all of them, or at the end of each class of weapons for them, because there are a LOT of guns on dog tags that aren't actually in the game. (SAA, SCAR-L, proper MG36, standard FAMAS, that weird suppressed Makarov PM variant, M203, and lots more) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:25, 26 January 2012 (CST)
:If no one objects to this, I'm going to create a sub-catagory at the bottom of each weapon class (SMG, shotgun, etc) that has all the Dog Tag-only weapons, because this page will get very confusing if we don't, as none of those weapons are in the game, just pictures of them. So far (of the top of my head) Makarov PB, Single Action Army, M1911A1, SPAS-12, SCAR-L, FAMAS (standard), M203, M16A2, M16A1, MG36 (proper). I'm sure there are more, but that's what I can think of right now. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:45, 4 February 2012 (CST)
::I've added everything I know of, but there are probably more. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:46, 8 February 2012 (CST)

== Patch is still yet to reach Xbox it appears ==

It appears as though the Xbox has been forgotten since the AN 94 still just has two fire modes and the HK416 still has it's three fire modes. Does anyone know more about it than me? --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:59, 17 February 2012 (CST)

:Yeah, we never got that patch that the other two platforms did. I'm assuming it'll be rolled into the patch that was originally supposed to come out for all platforms this month, but is now going to be in March at the earliest. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:57, 18 February 2012 (CST)

::Nope, here on the PS3 it's still the same, three-mode HK416 and two-mode AN94. DICE has gone on to say that across all consoles the stats are very different; however, the next patch will put all weapons on equal ground across all platforms. -- Long Fallen 02:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== All Fancy Right Side Dog Tags ==
I'm going to add this to the page soon, to replace the Dog Tag Weapons sections I made before, but right now I need sleep. They're sorted by the name of the real weapon in game, not in game name and not name of weapon in the picture, if those are different. If any of you can figure out what the not-actually-a-QBB-95 is, let me know :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:36, 1 March 2012 (CST)

[[Image:BF3_500KillGuns.jpg|thumb|none|650px]]

:You have no idea how grateful I am to see this in a neat compilation! Been looking everywhere for just these designs to no avail. -- Long Fallen 02:46, 2 March 2012 (CST)
I think the QBB-95 is a totally made up frankengun. However the core of it is actually an Enfield L85, you can tell by the vent holes on the receiver: 3 horizontal vents at the rear, then a slightly larger gap followed by two slightly smaller vents. Also visible is the raised portion on the bottom edge of the upper receiver which runs horizontally under these vent holes, and the pistol grip and trigger guard seem to match. On top it seems to be a grossly oversized M4/M16A4 detachable carry handle, and the front is anyone's guess. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:56, 2 March 2012 (CST)
::Yeah, I think you're right. It also has the generic bipod most guns in BF3 use, Harris Bipod I think it's called. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== Flash Suppresor ==
I know this is really not important and probably no one cares, but I think the flash suppresor may be a Vltor VC-1. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 17:15, 1 March 2012 (CST)
:You found it! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:28, 1 March 2012 (CST)

::Not important? Any info is very welcome on this site! In fact, I was wondering this myself. -- Long Fallen 02:48, 2 March 2012 (CST)

== 3 Expansions planned for BF3 ==

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/03/07/battlefield-3-close-quarters-announced.aspx

Newest expansion has 10 new guns, what are you guys thinking/hoping they will be? I'm hoping for a USP, perhaps another pump action shotgun,maybe a TAR or a Galil, and an XM8 (wishful thinking on that last one, but they put the Jackhammer in, so why not?) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 18:20, 7 March 2012 (CST)

EDIT: Can someone fix that link please? I'm not very good at this clearly.

Me being the AR fanboy that I am, I just want a short barreled AR (10 inches prefferably). cheech98 9:28, 7 March 2012

:HK416. I'd like to see another pump shotty and some pistols at the least. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:49, 7 March 2012 (CST)

Definitely a pump shotgun, maybe an Ithica or a Mossberg with wood furniture (because with black furniture it would look too much like the 870). I would like to see an AK in 7.62x39. I was honestly appalled that BF3 didn't feature a .30 cal AK. An MP5, a Hi-Power, a CZ-75 and a SIG-Sauer would also be nice; a non-tacticool FAL, maybe an FNC (always loved that gun), a Skorpion (come on, who doesn't wanna shoot that thing in a video game), the VZ-58, the HK P7 perhaps? The HK33 would be an awesome weapon to see (although admittedly not too plausible), an Uzi (full size or mini, doesn't really matter to me), ''maybe'' the Tavor (they have the QBZ, why not the TAR-21?), a Makarov (still common among the Russian Armed Forces, right?), the P99, and MORE REVOLVERS, DAMMIT. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 02:04, 8 March 2012 (CST)

Talk:Main Page

2012-01-26T07:41:18Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* A question about a bolt */

Talk:Main Page

2012-01-26T07:40:41Z

ManchurianCandidate: /* A question about a bolt */

Talk:Main Page

2012-01-26T07:40:19Z

ManchurianCandidate: