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

Talk:Burn Notice - Season 7

2013-07-29T18:18:07Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Gun handling */

Please help ID this rifle --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] ([[User talk:Ben41|talk]]) 02:15, 21 June 2013 (EDT)

[[File:BurnS7E02 17.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Forget Me Not" (S7E02)]]
[[File:BurnS7E02 20.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Forget Me Not" (S7E02)]]
: I'm not sure but this rifle resembles one of Templar Custom models, like [http://templarcustom.com/images/templar-custom-mcws-full-set.png this one]. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] ([[User talk:Greg-Z|talk]]) 02:39, 21 June 2013 (EDT)
::Don't think so, totally different rail system. Don't see enough of the rifle to work out if it is a production gun or just a custom job, but the rail system appears to be a Troy "TRX Extreme" or a derivative (don't know why part of it is cut away to expose the barrel nut though, might be an older version or something). It also appears to have an HK416 pistol grip, but it isn't an HK416 based on the lack of ambi markings, standard AR-15 barrel nut and the fact that you can't fit this handguard on a 416. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 20:59, 24 June 2013 (EDT)

== Please help ID (Update) ==

Please help ID this rifle. It appears to be in Chaote Sniper stock, but has a box magazine. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] ([[User talk:Ben41|talk]]) 16:14, 24 June 2013 (EDT)
[[File:BurnS7E03 02.jpg|thumb|none|600px|In "Down Range" (S7E03),]]
[[File:BurnS7E03 06.jpg|thumb|none|600px|In "Down Range" (S7E03),]]

:This is one of the strangest looking guns I have ever seen looking for an ID. However from the distinctive look of the right side charging handle and the bolt hrough the ejection port, I am fairly sure it is a Heckler & Koch Model 770:[[File:H&K model 770.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Heckler & Koch Model 770 - 7.62x51mm]] However I think it has been subjected to a lot of hacking to "modernise" it for TV. Firstly there is the Choate stock which has had to be hacked to make it fit as I am fairly sure they never made one for this rifle. secondly the trigger guard is different. Thirdly it has been fitted with an extended magazine (I think) as the only one sI have ever seen are either flush fit or only down to the bottom of the trigger guard. Lastly, it appears to be fitted with a barrel shroud with fake fluting and a suppressor, judging by the weld line at the front of the barrel taper. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 20:35, 24 June 2013 (EDT)

== Gun handling ==

Has anyone else noticed the drastic improvement in gun handling on this show during the last few seasons? Every year before season 5 had Michael showing a pretty bad teacup hold with poor trigger discipline but in season 5, he started used a really good thumbs forward grip with pretty good trigger discipline. I wonder what brought the change along because the shoddy gun skills on the show always irked me and I was pleasantly surprised to see the improvement michael's technique after 4 years.[[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] ([[User talk:ShootingLiberal|talk]]) 13:00, 27 July 2013 (EDT)

: Perhaps Jeffrey picked up some tips from the troops while traveling to Iraq for the USO tour. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] ([[User talk:Ben41|talk]]) 17:40, 28 July 2013 (EDT)
[[File:JefDonovanIraq.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]

That very well may be it. He kinda looks like Travis Haley in that pic in my opinion. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] ([[User talk:ShootingLiberal|talk]]) 14:18, 29 July 2013 (EDT)

Talk:Burn Notice - Season 7

2013-07-27T17:00:26Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Gun handling */ new section

Talk:The Last of Us

2013-06-28T10:59:53Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Missing a few guns */

== Cool! ==

Hopefully Naughty Dog will be able to make a decent Zombie/Survival/Horror game, unlike all those other suck-fest's in the genre since Resident Evil 3!
:Do you mean ''after'' RE3 or are you including RE3? What about Code Veronica? RE0? REmake? All were fantastic games in every way. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:36, 15 December 2011 (CST)
::Sorry, I meant 3 was the last really good one. I never played any of those "in between" RE's because they always seemed to be for some obscure system only. But these modern ones... RE5, Dead Island, etc... They're okay, just not the same. Dead Space came close... but in ''space''. I Am Alive probably won't happen and the next RE looks stu-pid. Naughty Dog usually does good work. I hope they can revive survival horror!

::Well, Code Veronica X was on PS2, which isn't exactly an "obscure" console (in fact, it's the most successful game console ever made and calling it obscure is like calling the AR-15 rare). Code Veronica HD is also available for DL on PSN (not sure about Xbox Live) I wouldn't label the Gamecube (which REmake and RE0 are still exclusive to) as obscure either, really. And sign your posts by putting four tildes after it. ("~") [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:42, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:::No, you're right. I don't know why I thought it was a such a hassle? Just go back and get a Gamecube whatever that is ;) Oh and I never sign posts when I'm ragging on something as sacred as VGs!

Dead Space isn't a zombie game, and there are quite a few zombie games that aren't "suck-fests" you just have bad taste, and if you're not going to sign your posts you might as well not post at all because post signing is mandatory here.[[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] 17:29, 29 February 2012 (CST)

:And not signing doesn't exactly make one's post anonymous... [[User:Acepeacemaker|Acepeacemaker]]! ;) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:46, 1 March 2012 (CST)

::Report me Kornflakes. This isn't really a zombie game either. -ACE

Yeah, from what I've seen to call this a zombie game would be like calling Fallout 3 a zombie game. It's a totally different animal. --[[User:K|K]] 13:55, 8 March 2012 (CST)

::Zombies are written differently in just about everything they're featured in, you got the most common virus zombies, voodoo zombies, enhanced rabies strain zombies, nuclear radiation zombies (which does include the Fallout ghouls), zombies made from some asteroid landing on earth from outer space, zombies made from eating someones brains when if they have some special hormone, zombies that mutate into fat gassy things, zombies that mutate and become covered in boils then explode, zombies that become twice as large as any human, zombies that run, zombies that shamble towards you, and many other different types of zombies.

It's like Batman, he's written differently depending on the person(s) writing him. [[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] 04:56, 15 August 2012 (CDT)

This game reminds of "[[I Am Legend]]" film, doesn't it? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:47, 9 March 2012 (CST)

Don't mean to revive a dead argument, but the infected enemies in this game are basically....zombies. [[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] ([[User talk:Kornflakes89|talk]]) 07:10, 28 May 2013 (EDT)

:I haven't been keeping up. What level of intelligence do they display? Are they brainless savages that would blindly rush headlong at an approaching bulldozer without regard or do they possess enough intelligence to use complex weapons (like firearms) and coordinate tactically as a group? In other words, do they behave like rage infectees or the ganados/majini from RE? If the latter, I personally wouldn't consider them zombies. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 16:08, 28 May 2013 (EDT)

::Pretty much brainless savages that blindly rush at a guy who's aiming a lead pipe at their skull, don't use any weapons other than their hands and mouths and the only group coordination they display is, see human, rush him, kill him, eat him, but they do that regardless of whether they're in a group or not. They don't show any combat tactics other than grabbing, biting and swatting with their hands and the only thing that implies they have some kind of communication skills is yelling, growling or screatching loudly once they see you which seems to attract some others but that could just be them being attracted by loud noises. So I would say it's safe to consider them zombies or at least zombie-like. Regardless, game looks great and I haven't played a Naughty Dog game that I haven't enjoyed yet. [[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] ([[User talk:Kornflakes89|talk]]) 21:35, 28 May 2013 (EDT)

==Story Trailer Weapon Listing==
Hey there! Just watched the new trailer for the game (which looks amazing!) and I noticed that there should be a lot more weapons this time around. Here are some that i have been able to find. Those who are capable can do screencaps and upload them here.

At :30, you can see Ellie cocking what appears to be a Beretta Cheetah with wood grips and stainless slide (She has good trigger discipline too)

At :49, Soldiers are seen weilding flat top M4 rifles

At 1:08, a man on the left is showin holding a type of pump action shotgun. Could be an Ithica or Mossberg model

At 1:20, Ellie is seen holding a weapon of similar design as in the begging, but this one seems to be based of a Colt (like the one in Uncharted 2+3)

Hope it helps, great to see the library of weapons is growing--[[User:Valant|A single bullet can change history]] ([[User talk:Valant|talk]]) 19:49, 12 December 2012 (EST)

I think the Beretta is a model 70 based on the trigger guard, mag release, and finger step on the magazine.--[[User:1911isthebestgunever|One shot is all it takes.]] ([[User talk:1911isthebestgunever|talk]]) 17:20, 21 April 2013 (EDT)

:I just added a bunch of images from the trailer to the page. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36|talk]]) 01:03, 22 April 2013 (EDT)

The "M4s" look to me like they could be full-length M16s with collapsible stocks. The barrel, handguard, and sight radius don't look short enough to be a carbine. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 16:19, 28 May 2013 (EDT)

Well, I love this game but the diversity in weapons is rather lacking. I mean... It's really hilarious how the Colt Defender is the primary handgun- it's not exactly a prolific model. There are no Berettas, no Glocks, no S&Ws? The the Taurus is the only revolver too? You would think that the examples of firearms in the end of the world would be whatever the survivors could get their hands on. --[[User:PyramidHead|PyramidHead]] ([[User talk:PyramidHead|talk]]) 16:39, 24 June 2013 (EDT)

I think the Beretta used by the FEDRA guard during the scene where the group is captured is actually a 92FS Brigadier. It's got the slide and it looks to be a full size handgun. I also echo previous sentiments that the Assault Rifles are definitely some sort of M16. The barrel is far too long to be an M4. My bet is an A3/A4 hybrid due to the rails and full auto firing capability.[[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] ([[User talk:ShootingLiberal|talk]]) 04:34, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

I'm gonna agree with you, Shooting. I thought on first glance the guard was using some sort of full sized Beretta, I obviously thought M9 at first with them being the US Military and all, but it's definitely a full sized Beretta. --[[User:PyramidHead|PyramidHead]] ([[User talk:PyramidHead|talk]]) 20:29, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

== Missing a few guns ==

There are three weapons not mentioned in the article.

I have no pictures of them and even if I did, I can't seem to nail the file upload system on this site. I shall try my best to visualize them.

In multiplayer, available for use is the "burst rifle," which fires in 3 round burst only. Naturally, with all the weird weapon choices in this game, Naughty Dig didn't decide to make it like... an M16A2 or M16A4. It's some really deformed looking assault rifle-ish thing with a skeleton butt stock, really short barrel, and an overall stubby appearance. My guess? A FAL Para. Maybe?

There's also a "military sniper" available in MP. It fires semi auto and sort of looks like the FNH Ballista, a Remington MSR, and/or the XM2010. But all those rifles are bolt action.

In singleplayer, Joel and his group are harassed by a bandit with some sort of military grade sniper rifle at one point while sneaking through some suburbs. Joel makes it tot he sniper's nest, deals with the sniper, and then uses the rifle to cover the group from bandit attacks and infected attacks. The rifle is never seen again and is mounted on a swiveling monopod. My guess was that it was some sort of British Accuracy International rifle, like the L118a or L96A1. --[[User:PyramidHead|PyramidHead]] ([[User talk:PyramidHead|talk]]) 20:48, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

I'm gonna go ahead and agree in regards to the sniper rifle. My first guess was an Accuracy International but I wasn't sure because I'm not very good with modern bolt actions. I know there's also some stock Remington makes for the 700 that makes it look similar to an AI but you'd probably know better than I would.[[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] ([[User talk:ShootingLiberal|talk]]) 06:59, 28 June 2013 (EDT)

Talk:The Last of Us

2013-06-27T08:34:48Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Story Trailer Weapon Listing */

== Cool! ==

Hopefully Naughty Dog will be able to make a decent Zombie/Survival/Horror game, unlike all those other suck-fest's in the genre since Resident Evil 3!
:Do you mean ''after'' RE3 or are you including RE3? What about Code Veronica? RE0? REmake? All were fantastic games in every way. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:36, 15 December 2011 (CST)
::Sorry, I meant 3 was the last really good one. I never played any of those "in between" RE's because they always seemed to be for some obscure system only. But these modern ones... RE5, Dead Island, etc... They're okay, just not the same. Dead Space came close... but in ''space''. I Am Alive probably won't happen and the next RE looks stu-pid. Naughty Dog usually does good work. I hope they can revive survival horror!

::Well, Code Veronica X was on PS2, which isn't exactly an "obscure" console (in fact, it's the most successful game console ever made and calling it obscure is like calling the AR-15 rare). Code Veronica HD is also available for DL on PSN (not sure about Xbox Live) I wouldn't label the Gamecube (which REmake and RE0 are still exclusive to) as obscure either, really. And sign your posts by putting four tildes after it. ("~") [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:42, 23 December 2011 (CST)

:::No, you're right. I don't know why I thought it was a such a hassle? Just go back and get a Gamecube whatever that is ;) Oh and I never sign posts when I'm ragging on something as sacred as VGs!

Dead Space isn't a zombie game, and there are quite a few zombie games that aren't "suck-fests" you just have bad taste, and if you're not going to sign your posts you might as well not post at all because post signing is mandatory here.[[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] 17:29, 29 February 2012 (CST)

:And not signing doesn't exactly make one's post anonymous... [[User:Acepeacemaker|Acepeacemaker]]! ;) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:46, 1 March 2012 (CST)

::Report me Kornflakes. This isn't really a zombie game either. -ACE

Yeah, from what I've seen to call this a zombie game would be like calling Fallout 3 a zombie game. It's a totally different animal. --[[User:K|K]] 13:55, 8 March 2012 (CST)

::Zombies are written differently in just about everything they're featured in, you got the most common virus zombies, voodoo zombies, enhanced rabies strain zombies, nuclear radiation zombies (which does include the Fallout ghouls), zombies made from some asteroid landing on earth from outer space, zombies made from eating someones brains when if they have some special hormone, zombies that mutate into fat gassy things, zombies that mutate and become covered in boils then explode, zombies that become twice as large as any human, zombies that run, zombies that shamble towards you, and many other different types of zombies.

It's like Batman, he's written differently depending on the person(s) writing him. [[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] 04:56, 15 August 2012 (CDT)

This game reminds of "[[I Am Legend]]" film, doesn't it? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:47, 9 March 2012 (CST)

Don't mean to revive a dead argument, but the infected enemies in this game are basically....zombies. [[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] ([[User talk:Kornflakes89|talk]]) 07:10, 28 May 2013 (EDT)

:I haven't been keeping up. What level of intelligence do they display? Are they brainless savages that would blindly rush headlong at an approaching bulldozer without regard or do they possess enough intelligence to use complex weapons (like firearms) and coordinate tactically as a group? In other words, do they behave like rage infectees or the ganados/majini from RE? If the latter, I personally wouldn't consider them zombies. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 16:08, 28 May 2013 (EDT)

::Pretty much brainless savages that blindly rush at a guy who's aiming a lead pipe at their skull, don't use any weapons other than their hands and mouths and the only group coordination they display is, see human, rush him, kill him, eat him, but they do that regardless of whether they're in a group or not. They don't show any combat tactics other than grabbing, biting and swatting with their hands and the only thing that implies they have some kind of communication skills is yelling, growling or screatching loudly once they see you which seems to attract some others but that could just be them being attracted by loud noises. So I would say it's safe to consider them zombies or at least zombie-like. Regardless, game looks great and I haven't played a Naughty Dog game that I haven't enjoyed yet. [[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] ([[User talk:Kornflakes89|talk]]) 21:35, 28 May 2013 (EDT)

==Story Trailer Weapon Listing==
Hey there! Just watched the new trailer for the game (which looks amazing!) and I noticed that there should be a lot more weapons this time around. Here are some that i have been able to find. Those who are capable can do screencaps and upload them here.

At :30, you can see Ellie cocking what appears to be a Beretta Cheetah with wood grips and stainless slide (She has good trigger discipline too)

At :49, Soldiers are seen weilding flat top M4 rifles

At 1:08, a man on the left is showin holding a type of pump action shotgun. Could be an Ithica or Mossberg model

At 1:20, Ellie is seen holding a weapon of similar design as in the begging, but this one seems to be based of a Colt (like the one in Uncharted 2+3)

Hope it helps, great to see the library of weapons is growing--[[User:Valant|A single bullet can change history]] ([[User talk:Valant|talk]]) 19:49, 12 December 2012 (EST)

I think the Beretta is a model 70 based on the trigger guard, mag release, and finger step on the magazine.--[[User:1911isthebestgunever|One shot is all it takes.]] ([[User talk:1911isthebestgunever|talk]]) 17:20, 21 April 2013 (EDT)

:I just added a bunch of images from the trailer to the page. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36|talk]]) 01:03, 22 April 2013 (EDT)

The "M4s" look to me like they could be full-length M16s with collapsible stocks. The barrel, handguard, and sight radius don't look short enough to be a carbine. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 16:19, 28 May 2013 (EDT)

Well, I love this game but the diversity in weapons is rather lacking. I mean... It's really hilarious how the Colt Defender is the primary handgun- it's not exactly a prolific model. There are no Berettas, no Glocks, no S&Ws? the the Taurus is the only revolver too? You would think that the examples of firearms in the end of the world would be whatever the survivors could get their hands on. --[[User:PyramidHead|PyramidHead]] ([[User talk:PyramidHead|talk]]) 16:39, 24 June 2013 (EDT)

I think the Beretta used by the FEDRA guard during the scene where the group is captured is actually a 92FS Brigadier. It's got the slide and it looks to be a full size handgun. I also echo previous sentiments that the Assault Rifles are definitely some sort of M16. The barrel is far too long to be an M4. My bet is an A3/A4 hybrid due to the rails and full auto firing capability.[[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] ([[User talk:ShootingLiberal|talk]]) 04:34, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

Talk:Lawless

2012-09-04T13:57:33Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Your Opinion */

In this image you can see the guns that the main characters use: [[File:Lawless Guns.jpg|none|400px|thumb|]]
Not sure what gun they actually use in the movie is, but the revolver pictured for Howard is not a [[Webley .38 Mk IV]], but is the earlier [[Webley .455 Mk VI]] (you can tell by the front sight blade and by the separate holster guide and cylinder cam rather than the one piece one used on the later revolvers). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:25, 13 August 2012 (CDT)
:The Colt DS is also flipped, with the cylinder release on the right instead of the left side of the gun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 08:50, 13 August 2012 (CDT)
::In the new trailer and the extra material the colt can be spotted.--[[User:Dillinger|Dillinger]] 03:19, 14 August 2012 (CDT)

==Break-Open Revolver==
[[File:LawlessBreakOpenRevolver.jpg|none|600px|thumb|]]

Could this possibly be Howard's Webley from the poster above? [[User:Czar|Czar]]
:i was about asking that.--[[User:Dillinger|Dillinger]] 01:13, 30 August 2012 (CDT)

::Zooming in, it looks like my .455 Webley MkIV (which lacks the hump at the top of the grip like the MkVI; mine has the bird's head grip like the MkV). Since the top of the grip in the pictute has the hump, I'll call it a Webley and a MkVI. Ain't saying I'm always right, but on this one I am pretty sure. --[[User:Carl N. Brown|Carl N. Brown]] 07:04, 4 September 2012 (CDT)

==Your Opinion==
From the critics reactions to the film seems to be splitting people, for those whohave already seen it what do you think?--[[User:Dillinger|Dillinger]] 01:26, 30 August 2012 (CDT)

Eh, it was decent. There were some brutal scenes in there that didn't scimp on the gore but the shootouts weren't anything impressive. The ending gun battle was the most awkward looking firefight I've ever scene. Not bad but not great either. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 08:57, 4 September 2012 (CDT)

Talk:Medal of Honor: Warfighter

2012-08-15T18:43:50Z

ShootingLiberal: /* New trailer weapons */

== LaRue OBR ==

I changed the M4 entry, but I don't have a picture of the OBR without LaRue watermaks. -- Spike785 2/25/2012 10:35PM

Yeah, I went ahead and removed the M4 picture. No point in having it there if it isn't the weapon being described. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:53, 25 February 2012 (CST)

I suppose I should have done that. Should I link the 7.62 OBR pic? Or buy one and upload some sexy pics of it? [[User:Spike785|Spike785]] 23:19, 25 February 2012

Its not an OBR like I originaly thought, its a PredatAR. The handguard is too thin to be an OBR's, and the way the handguard angles up toward the reciever gives it away. [[User:Spike785|Spike785]] 9:21, 26 February 2012

:It is an OBR 5.56, the top rail is raised up higher than on a PredatAR. The 5.56 OBR is pretty different to the 7.62 in terms of the handguard being more like the PredatAR one. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:04, 26 February 2012 (CST)

== MEU(SOC) Pistol? ==

Is that the M1911 variant in new game? The lower part of slide doesn't seem to end like one. It could be one of custom M1911s used by Delta Force. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:33, 8 March 2012 (CST)

I'm just happy there's a 1911, period. lol Hopefully it appears in the SP campaign, though. I've no interest in MP. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 19:35, 8 March 2012 (CST)

the M1911 makes me happy as well but I'd also like to see another SIG in SP. [[User:Bristow8411|Bristow8411]] 22:20, 8 March 2012 (CST)

== Sniper Rifle in Trailer ==

[http://www.medalofhonor.com/blog/2012/03/shoot-win Shoot To Win | Medal of Honor]

It's one of the four: [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-cs5.php CS5] / [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-tac-300.php TAC-300] / [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-tac-50.php TAC-50] / [http://www.springfield-armory.com/armory.php?clicktype=rifles M1A] (McMillan customized)

And totally not M40 of any kind.

--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 14:58, 23 March 2012 (CDT)

Sweet, we get to play as Ryan McMillan. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:24, 23 March 2012 (CDT)

It's propbly the the TAC-300, the limited edition of the game come with a MP SEAL skin and the TAC-300 rifle early unlocks. - Wantabe_Warrior

== More details of the cover art! ==

[http://www.medalofhonor.com/blog/2012/03/worlds-finest-illumination-tools-and-tactical-products SureFire, LLC | Medal of Honor]

The [http://www.surefire.com/FA556-212-Suppressor FA556-212 Sound Suppressor], attached to the [http://www.surefire.com/mb556k-muzzle-brakeadapter.html MB556K Muzzle Brake / Suppressor Adapter];

The [http://www.surefire.com/m720v.html M720V RAID WeaponLight], attached to the left rail of the weapon, with its remote dual switch attached to the top rail of the weapon.

--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:23, 31 March 2012 (CDT)

== Dual Sights! ==

[http://www.medalofhonor.com/blog/2012/04/brilliant-aiming-solutions Trijicon, Inc. | Medal of Honor]

''"We will also give the player the ability to deploy ACOG® weapon sights with a “piggy-back” Ruggedized Miniature Reflex or RMR® for close-quarter engagements without having to transition from the primary to a secondary weapon system. But just in case, if gamers want to forgo all magnification, they may also choose to outfit their weapon with the full sized Trijicon Reflex Sight."''

'''Another conclusion''': the weapon sight on the cover art turns out to be [http://www.militarywarfighter.com/Trijicon_TA01NSNRMR_p/trijicon-ta01nsn-rmr.htm TA01NSN-RMR] rather than [http://www.militarywarfighter.com/Trijicon_TA01NSNDOC_p/trijicon-ta01nsn-doc.htm TA01NSN-DOC].

'''Another speculation''': will the [http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product3.php?pid=RX01 RX01] / [http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product3.php?pid=RX01NSN RX01NSN] reflex sight have correct amber dot reticle, like IRL, or incorrect red dot reticle, like in [[Battlefield 3|BF3]]? Place your bets.

--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:46, 6 April 2012 (CDT)

== MP interview firearms ==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-wWouKKQEM&feature=player_embedded

SASR armed with an AUG (I assume Austeyr) at 0:55 and a mortar of some sort at 1:08.[[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]]
:Don't think it is an Austeyr as it is missing the bayonet lug on the barrel. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:01, 12 June 2012 (CDT)

== Steyr AUG ==

In a video report of the E3 2012 on the official website the AUG make a short apperance. It's actual game footage from the multiplayer contest at the LA expo and the rifle is shown used by the guys who won the contest. It appears with a tan camo and dual sight.
(sorry fot eh weak english)
:By the look of the camoflage on the arm (DPDU) it looks like its for the aussies, though thats a little erroneous seeing we have our own steyrs (F88SA2's as of current, see [http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=89682.0;attach=29950;image])

== SIG P-226, HK USP - Medal of Honor Warfighter Grudge Match ==

What looks like a SIG P-226 and a HK USP can be seen in this video: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6TORbW87qE]--[[User:Mattatack92|Mattatack92]] 01:10, 23 July 2012 (CDT)

Freddie's got a SIG P226. EDIT: Actually I think he uses a USP9 for the second match. --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 10:18, 23 July 2012 (CDT)

Its not a USP. Its a HK45C with extended 10 round magazine. Same one Navy SEALs have been using for a few years. I'm sure the player just mistook it for a USP. [http://www.gunblast.com/images/SHOT2009/Day3/DSC04917.JPG] --[[User:snake1|snake1]]

Yeah I was just about to say that, at one point in the video you can see HK45C written on the slide and HK45 on the grip. Here's the pic: [[Image:HK45CMOH.JPG|thumb|none|500px|The slide reads ''HK45C .45 Auto'' and ''HK45'' can be seen on the grip. The pistol also has a threaded barrel.]] --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 10:46, 23 July 2012 (CDT)

== New trailer weapons ==

From what I can see in the new fireteam trailer the Glock variant is an 18, there's a PKP Pecheneg, a SMAW, an AK5, an AKS-74U with a fixed stock or possibly a generic Krinkov (referred to as "Suchka" or "Little Bitch", a Kimber 1911, a Remington 870, an OBR 7.62, what I think is an MSR, the F88 AUG and an M79 grenade launcher. There's also an M86 PDM as seen in the killfeed on one of the shots. Here's a link to see if anyone can spot something I missed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUxxNv3NCB8&feature=channel&list=UL--[[User:Recon42|Recon42]] 07:28, 15 August 2012 (CDT)

You sure that's a Kimber? I watched the trailer a couple times and never got a really good look at the 1911. Maybe it's the one that Larry Vickers built for the game.
http://www.recoilweb.com/larry-vickers-demos-hk-mp7-7665.html
Either way, I'm glad we get to kick some ass using JMB's masterpiece in this one. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 13:43, 15 August 2012 (CDT)

Talk:Battlefield 3

2011-07-27T04:53:47Z

ShootingLiberal: /* 1911 spotted */ new section

== Beta ==

Does anyone know when the beta is starting? cant wait for it! --[[Special:Contributions/109.78.246.33|109.78.246.33]] 21:34, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Or for that matter, how we can get in on it? [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]]

To get into the Battlefield 3 beta, you need to buy specially-marked versions of the recent Medal Of Honor [[User:SeanWolf]]

Ya i got it, do you know when were getting the codes?--[[User:GunGunGun|GunGunGun]] 02:40, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I have no clue.[[User:SeanWolf]]

If you registered your Medal of Honor with your EA-Account, you'll get the invitation and infos, as soon as there is something, so far nothing is known.

Wish I could try the beta [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

:Not just you, after the videos they releases pretty much everybody is dying to get hands on the game. [[User:Killerpixel|Killerpixel]] 12:05, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

== AK-something-something ==

Check that dude in the BG. also what I think *might* be a holster, but I'm probably wrong.

http://bf3nation.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/bf6.jpg

:It's definitely an AK-series rifle, which one I can't be sure of. If I had to guess however, I'd say either an AK-74, AK-74M, or AK-101. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 08:15, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

:It's a dump bag on his hip. At least that's what I think it is. It definitely isn't a holster though, since most drop leg holsters are strapped to your thigh. Why a guy with a belt fed machine gun has a dump bag through is beyond me.--[[User:1SAZ|1SAZ]] 09:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

::If I had to guess, he may have been issued an M4 or M16 and picked up the MG prior to the pic being taken. You can also see some STANAG mag pouches on the front of his vest too. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 03:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

:::I Agree with Orca1, I know you can't see from the distance, but the profile of the muzzle looks like one of those 3. As the game is set in 2014, im assuming it's either an AK-74M or AK-101. --[[User:Chablar|Chablar]] 13:45, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

== M240G is M240B ==

The M240G is actually a M240B as seen by gameplay screenshots. You can also identify it's M240B by the heat shield. I guess that inaccuracy in every war game (including new games) will always be. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 11:44, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

:I knew it was some kind of M240 variant, but since it was being used by a Marine I assumed it was the 240-Golf variant since they typically use that instead of the 240-Bravo. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 03:26, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Wrong use of the word "anachronistic" there. An anachronism is an object, event, or person portrayed in a chronologically inaccurate time period. The Marines using the M240B is a mistake, no doubt, but it's not an anachronism as the M240B still does technically ''exist'' at the same time beside the Golf model. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:42, 6 March 2011 (MSK)

== M16A4? ==

Got these pics off BF3 nation;
http://bf3nation.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/bf1.jpg appears to be some M16 varient which oddly enough doesnt have any rear sights.
http://bf3nation.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/bf5.jpg Another shot of the M16 like weapon (Just going to mention the nice detail on the mag). And hey, new weapon, A COFFEE MUG!!!
--[[User:GunGunGun|GunGunGun]] 15:02, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

It is an M16A4, the developers probably didn't detailed the weapon enough. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 16:08, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

:Yeah I noticed this as well. Im guessing they just forgot, The sights are even not there in the gameplay videos. I do hope they change it though, might seen a little silly firing with neither iron sights or optics. --[[User:Chablar|Chablar]] 13:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

in the new 12 min trailer, roughly at the 7min mark when they put surpessive fire on the sniper, is it me or does the guy on the left, with the M16A4 fire full auto?. [[User:Sike|Sike]] 17:20, 18 April 2011 (CDT)

I'm commenting without checking, but remember how fast you can fire the M16A4 and 93R in BC2? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:23, 19 April 2011 (CDT)

== Racking charging handle when reloading after empty ==

A new trailer showed you shooting an M4 and when you are empty, you reload but instead of pressing the bolt release, you charge the handle. I seriously hope this isn't the default reload [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:35, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

At the begining of the trailer, it did say that it was pre-alpha code. They'll hopefully have the modeling and other animations fixed by then.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 05:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, cause I'm getting bad flashbacks to games in early 2000 that pulls the charging handle when doing mid mag reloads [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:31, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, the M16A2 & M4A1 reloading animations from ''[[Battlefield 2|BF2]]'' had the character use the charging handle instead of the bolt release when reloading, they may have borrowed that. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 05:58, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

:3D modeling and animation is kinda hard to "borrow" from older engine/file format. I'd guess it's probably "director thinks this looks more dynamic" like [[Black]], or maybe the animator is under heavy influence of games in early 2000 :/ [[User:Ssate|Ssate]] 02:43, 12 April 2011 (CDT)

Well I hope they change it to using bolt release because it's wield for someone to do that unless you're clearing a malfunction [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm liking how they now keep track of a round in the chamber and you don't go through the whole reloading animation, maybe this time we'll have proper pistol reloads.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

What's a "proper" pistol reload? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 20:21, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
: I think he meant that the slide does not lock back when the pistol runs out, like in Medal Of Honor MP. [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 20:43, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Also in Bad Company and the second one they did the same thing where the slide didn't lock back. If it's one thing Modern Warfare has done right is the reload animation...well except maybe for the ACR. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:14, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
:There was also a problem with the SPAS-12: the character pump it after the reload even if there was a shell in the chamber. Same in Black Ops. Not to mention that "all pistols were DAO" since the hammers never move. [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:52, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

About reloads, in last years Metal of Honor, you do a combat reload when your shotgun is empty. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Another nice touch that they put in was that they left the front sight on the M4 even though it has an optical sight. In most games the front sight is either removed completely (like Bad Company 2 or Call of Duty 4) or else it has a flip down front sight (like Modern Warfare 2). Adds a nice level of realism in my opinion.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 06:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

:I always thought removing the front sight from M4/M16 rifles in games was utterly stupid mall ninja BS, not to mention making the gun look ugly as sin. In a real-world situation, if your optic fails and you don't have any iron sights to fall back on, you're basically SOL while the other guy who's never even heard of a red dot sight is still capable of sending rounds your way. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 10:48, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

::Don't some optics already mount back-up irons (BUS / BUIS) on them? [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 11:46, 8 March 2011 (MSK)

:Yeah I noticed this too. All BF games seem to get reloads completely wrong. You get the feeling the make you rack the charging handle with a mid mag reload to clear the current round so they don't have to take it into account. As awesome as charging the action yourself, or racking the top slide looks, you just never do it during a normal reload. I do hope they change this yeah, but I doubt they will looking back at the other games. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Battlefield games, but I don't see how its that hard to get weapons right when they hire Ex-military guys to get everything else right. You can even find these things on Google these days. And with COD removing the iron sights on the M16s and M4s they are also removing the gas block. The gun would have to fire one round and then the action be charged manually. I love these games, but some times the ignorance they show towards the things they claim are most important pisses me off a bit.--[[User:Chablar|Chablar]] 14:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

::Well, at least they don't go the extra mile and have guns being fired with the safety on, I can think of a couple of games that do that. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 14:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

:The use of military and ex-military people are for realistic look of the soldiers, their movements, they communications, and look of ground vehicles and aircraft... But don't forget that it is not that hard to search for photos in the internet of weapons, vehicles, aircraft, uniforms, equipment, etc. and create it in the computer, without using the help of the military guys. As what we see know. BF3 goes for the realistic way, that's right, but it is not realistic in the small details. CoD4:MW, CoD:MW2, CoD:BO, the new MoH, OFP series, ArmA series, and of course the series of BF from BF2 and onwards have so many unrealistic small details that can be fixed easily by using mod tools. The developers doesn't really care if the M4A1 has gas block (CoD) or if you charge the weapon with the charging handle (BF2, BF3), they just want to create a game, realistic or not just the gamers will be happy. It is a bit funny as so many things are so realistic in this game but someone who has good military knowledge will notice right away for the f*** ups. In OFP:RR for example, they only thing that bothers me is that the M16A4 in-game looks like the Canadian C7 rifle. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 18:50, 5 March 2011 (MSK)

don't forget in MW2, fans were commenting that the rear flip up sight on the SCAR was backwards and would back towards the shooter and not forward. IW didn't change it cause they don't care of the little details. Also I like to see a game where they have a random chance to destroy your optic so can you actually can flip up your irons. After the EMP in MW2, they forgot that pretty much all the M4s and SCARS had flip up sights but none of them bothered to flip them up. That'll be the first thing I noticed when I aim or the fact that the ACOG is not electronic and would still work when an EMP hits. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 19:43, 5 March 2011 (MSK)

*Let's not forget MW2 is the same game which showed the Model 1887 being reloaded by having every cartridge put into the barrel. Would certainly make for an interesting first shot... [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 19:58, 5 March 2011 (MSK)

::In the words of the Demo Man from ''[[Team Fortress 2]]'', "Ka-BOOM!" :P [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 20:18, 5 March 2011 (MSK)

New behind-the-scenes footage reveals that there are partial reload animations --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 20:16, 5 March 2011 (MSK)

I liked how ''[[Project Reality]]'' completely replaced the M16/M4 reload animation from ''BF2''; the only time the charging handle is messed with is when you first bring the weapon up, and even then it's more of a brass check than a full pull back. The reloading animation has you swap the mags, hit the bolt release, and check the ejection port. Much more realistic reloading animation. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 07:03, 6 March 2011 (MSK)

What I wish is adding different animation for reloads. If you are in the middle of an intense fire fight, you reload and press the bolt faster and you randomly fumble with your reload cause it happens. Or if the firefight is over, you do a more slow reload. Also if the gun has flip up sights, I want to see an animation where you actually flip those irons up [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 11:02, 6 March 2011 (MSK)

:I don't think I'd be happy with the former; same as random jams or giving singleplayer enemies a chance of getting an instakill headshot on the player, it isn't much fun having the game secretly flipping a coin to decide if you get screwed or not. ''Black'' did slower reloads if you weren't being fired at, though; it either sped the whole animation up or skipped the unnecessary wanking around if you were being shot at when you pressed reload. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 11:50, 8 March 2011 (MSK)

Another thing about leaving the front sight post on the M4s is that the red dot sight is raised and not like in COD4 where it is mounted on the rail. Maybe in real life, having 2 eyes would sort of work, but even then you can still have a front post bother your eye looking at it. It wouldn't be a clear shot [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 11:04, 6 March 2011 (MSK)

:The only game I've seen that gets it all right is Crysis 2, and the weapons are all fictional, though they could all easily exist. It's got both reload animations (six actually, because you do them different in Armour or Stealth mode), +1 in the chamber, attachments on your gun based on where they're mounted (one optic, a suppressor or no suppressor, and an underbarrel), believable damages based on calibres, functioning pistol hammers, and pistol slides that lock back when empty and not as part of the reload animation (meaning you can run around and stuff with a locked empty pistol). [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:02, 16 March 2011 (CDT)

== PKM ==

At the left on the bridge an enemy soldier have a Pkm machine gun :
http://www.dualshockers.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Battlefield3_Gogogo.jpg (high resolution sorry) [[User:Arrak|Arrak]]

== Disable Vehicles ==

New info at Kotaku and others mentions "Temporarily disabling vehicles". I'm thinking it may be some sort of EMP thing, though, even for BF that's a stretch. What would be preferable, is if for instance... a tank... had several parts that were damageable. Things like treads, optics, engines, etc could be disabled in order to halt a tank. Same goes with tires and stuff like that with other vehicles. This'd be really cool in my opinion, for instance, snipers could damage the optics of a tank with say a .50 BMG round, temporarily of course. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 20:23, 3 June 2011 (CDT)

== M16 Carry Handle Fix ==

If anybody's seen the EA PWNED BF3 episode, it looks like they've added the carry handle to the M16A4. Two short clips demonstrating the ANT animation system that show the M16A4 with it. Good stuff. Also, did anyone notice how they're making prone realistic? It seems they're having the player's elbows be fixed rotateable spots along with the player's spine being able to bend a certain number of degrees. In order to rotate around, the player has to physically crawl over to view that area. It's easy to see in the animation demos that I referred to, but it's also noticeable on the 12 minute trailer when the Marines are on the rooftop, watch the perspective of the player's weapon and how it moves in relation to the arms. Very cool indeed, because I know balancing prone has always been a problem with BF. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 09:15, 30 May 2011 (CDT)

== Multiplayer Teaser ==

there is a MP teaser up on www.origin.com, looks like they have gone and screwed the m4 up, (removed front site) [[User:Sike|Sike]] 16:22, 6 June 2011 (CDT)

Can't get a good enough look at the gas block to tell. Anywho... I spotted the M16A4, a Mk 46/M249, M9 pistol, the PKM Pencheng, SVD, Mk 11/SR-25 (Not a M110, no full URX rail), AKS-74, and the Grach pistol. All but the SVD and Grach are viewable in the trailer, the AKS-74, SVD, and Grach are visible in the corner where it lists the kills. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 16:36, 6 June 2011 (CDT)

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2011-battlefield-3/714884 pause at 0:19 for the M4, [[User:Sike|Sike]] 16:42, 6 June 2011 (CDT)

:The AKS-74U screenshot shows what appears to be an enemy carrying two [[RPG-7]] launchers. Can't tell if they have optics or straight iron sights. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 14:56, 7 June 2011 (CDT)

== Who? ==

Who put the Mk 11 as the 9A-91? Travesty, stoked that the Mk 11 is in though. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 14:30, 7 June 2011 (CDT)

== AK-74M ==

This photo was posted on battlefields facebook page.

[[File:BF3_IMFDB_(AK-74).JPG]]

It seems that while the US gets an M-4A1 with and without optics, the Russians/PLR get an AK-74M.
--[[User:Mattatack92|Mattatack92]] 00:54, 8 June 2011 (CDT)

This might've just been the loadouts they had for E3, doesn't necessarily confirm faction specific weaponry. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 14:00, 8 June 2011 (CDT)

:Is that PSO-1 or the same unidentified sight from Medal of Honor? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:31, 20 June 2011 (CDT)

== Physical Warfare Pack ==

New weapons, folks!

[http://www.totalgamingnetwork.com/content.php?4305-Battlefield-3-Limited-Edition-Physical-Warfare-Pack-Available-for-Preorder-in-UK Battlefield 3 Limited Edition: Physical Warfare Pack Available for Preorder in UK]

Time for article update? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:08, 26 May 2011 (CDT)

:I see they're calling it the DAO-12 again. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:14, 26 May 2011 (CDT)

:Type 88 (and it seems the Bipod is an attachment), "DAO-12" lol, with Flechette ammo, aaaaaaaand... a Flash Suppressor for the "SKS Sniper Rifle"!!!! [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:44, 26 May 2011 (CDT)

::"SKS Sniper Rifle?" So we're set in California? Watch out, the bad guys have high-capacity 15-round magazines! [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:56, 26 May 2011 (CDT)

:::Isn't the SKS 10 rounds though? I never really liked the look of the SKS, but I've seen a lot of people on this site post about wanting it in a game for once, so it'll make all them happy :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:37, 26 May 2011 (CDT)

::::Yeah, I'm just talking generally; you know, scary handguns with high-capacity magazines and laws to rid the streets of the scourge of drive-by rifle grenadings and gangland bayonet charges. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:45, 26 May 2011 (CDT)

:::::Haha, yeah, I'm from Canada, and while we don't actually have as strict laws as, say, California, what we have is lots of paperwork and time spent training for licenses, etc. Making them harder to get and needing more knowledge about them is way better than just banning them. I never understood that, oooo, a bayonet mount, oh no! A pistol grip? They'll kill us so much more efficiently now! Criminals use illegally bought weapons that aren't registered. And that guy that comes home to find his wife is cheating on him? He's so mad he'll kill both of them, and they think he won't just get a knife or something? I'm not supporting killing people, but people would still do it even if all the firearms on Earth went away. We were pretty damn good at it for the thousands of years before we invented them... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:36, 26 May 2011 (CDT)
::::::Agreed :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:26, 26 May 2011 (CDT)

Still no update? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:16, 8 June 2011 (CDT)

'laws to rid the streets of the scourge of drive-by rifle grenadings' - I lol'd --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 08:11, 12 June 2011 (CDT)

Why in the hell would they make the SKS a 'Sniper Rifle'? I mean calling the Dragunov a true sniper rifle is pretty much... wrong, I'm okay with it though, but an SKS?
I'll admit I'm not very experienced with the SKS myself, maybe it's a tack driver in disguise, but from what I've heard it's just a little more accurate than your standard AK47 and that's not saying much.... --[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 12:56, 18 June 2011 (CDT)

:Well there are only going to be semi-auto sniper rifles, so really, there are only DMRs anyway. It's not like it's a sniper class, it's a recon class, so that's not missnamed. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:59, 18 June 2011 (CDT)

:: Source? There's no way they'd make all the sniper rifles semi-automatic. We've only seen semi-automatics, yes, but there's no confirmation that they'll -all- be semi-automatic. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 20:09, 18 June 2011 (CDT)

:That's what I got out of the Recon description here:
http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/battlefield_bad_company/archive/2011/06/08/battlefield-3-at-e3-roundup.aspx
Semi-auto and C4. That could just mean default, and you still get bolt-actions and the mortar later, but I really think they mean they removed both of those, to balance the issues with those two things in BC2. Everyone uses Recon, everyone hides with a one hit kill sniper rifle, and everyone calls in their magic mortars from anywhere onto anything. It looks like they're trying to make the Recon kit more of a DMR kit than a true sniper, which is probably better, it fits the squad play better as a DMR and a support gunner do the same job, one with high amounts of precision, the other with high amounts of ammo. On a different note, I'm pretty sure the M4A1 will be in the engineer kit because it has a flashlight and will be the counterpart to the AKS-74U, like the M16A4 and AK-74M. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:36, 18 June 2011 (CDT)

: They meant at the E3 demo, the Recon class has a semi-automatic sniper rifle. At the E3 Demo. Hence the "E3 Roundup" title, it's not dismissing anything, just saying what they saw at E3. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 21:47, 18 June 2011 (CDT)

Finally :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:12, 20 June 2011 (CDT)

== M249 SAW is actually Mk. 46 Mod 0? ==

By looking at the handgurads, I noticed that they are sticking out like the Mk. 46 Mod 0's handguards instead of the flat M249 SAW's heatshield. Also, because the weapon is fitted with M145 ECLAN scope, this could be the same model as in Medal of Honor, only it is rendered differently or something like that to fit Battlefield 3's engine. So, could be? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 03:54, 9 June 2011 (CDT)

: Yep, it's for sure the Mk 46. Though, it's all one nacho. Glad with the weapon choices they're going with so far. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 10:34, 9 June 2011 (CDT)

Glad to see the M145 MGO, presumably in place of the ACOG. Nice touch. --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 08:13, 12 June 2011 (CDT)

Yep, there's also some speculation that there'll be multiple types of 4x optics for each weapon, like you could put the Elcan on an M4. But I think it's more likely that each weapon will just have a different model of ACOG-type optic. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 08:27, 12 June 2011 (CDT)

:If that's the case, I'm putting the ELCAN on the M16A4, and if there's camo I'm making it green :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:08, 12 June 2011 (CDT)

::Canadian, eh? :P --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:28, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

:Yup ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:12, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

== P90 in IGN preview ==

here

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/117/1172554/battlefield-3-20110606090440594-000.jpg

the magazine looks like its either missing or modeled way to small

source http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/117/1172554p1.html

sorry i dont know how to embed an image [[User:Sike|Sike]] 07:54, 10 June 2011 (CDT)

there's a clear model error...the magazine is lodged inside the weapon at an angle and the charging handles are floating above the magazine in midair.
however, the magazine looks like its of appropriate size and its transparent....would be a nice touch if the bullets inside would actually be visible and move.

May perhaps point to an extended magazines type system, though you'd expect the studio to realise that the P90 feeds from the rear so this wouldn't function --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 08:09, 12 June 2011 (CDT)

There are Extended Magazines, you can see them in the loadout window in some of the E3 footage on a PKP Pecheneg. But, what the P90 is likely, is just a pre-alpha mess-up. The magazine is there and properly sized, its' just angled downward into the weapon/barrel. It's not married properly to the P90 and is likely just a glitch that will be fixed. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 08:29, 12 June 2011 (CDT)

Fair enough, pretty cool that things such as extended magazines have made it into BF3 --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 12:22, 12 June 2011 (CDT)

== M4A1 ==

I just saw the latest video where the M4A1 had a holo-sight and the gas block was removed. Looks like this will be just another unrealistic game after all. But at least the character pressed the BCRB instead of pulling the charging handle. Damn it, when will a new Rainbow Six game come out?! - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 14:38, 17 June 2011 (CDT)

It's not a big deal. The M4A1 still kills people and looks great. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 14:47, 17 June 2011 (CDT)

:I might be a bit annoying to have every game M4 lose its gas block, but it really doesn't matter THAT much, and it makes the scope view clearer. To say that it will be "just another unrealistic game" because of that is silly, just pretend it has one of those super mini gas blocks, you wouldn't even be able to see it anyway. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:57, 17 June 2011 (CDT)

:: The problem is that I don't want to have a clear view because soldiers do not have clear view ALL the time. And there is a nice little thing called "flat-top riser". One might wonder why was it invented.... - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 17:07, 17 June 2011 (CDT)

:But they're ugly and no one uses them. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:45, 17 June 2011 (CDT)

:Would be cool if removing gas block was optional and made gun bolt-action. Talk about killing with skill :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:28, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

== Some Weapon Spots ==

(Continuously updated) This video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwT6x7zEQ8c) shows on the kill-feed that the SVD makes a return for Battlefield 3 at 2:20. At 3:48 you see an enemy in the engineer class holding what appears to be an RPG-7 at 3:48. The kill-feed shows at 4:06 a MP-443 pistol. Clear look at an RPG-7 with on the back of an enemy soldier with the rocket (quite dangerously) inserted at 6:03 and again at 7:23. --[[User:DaiTaNam|DaiTaNam]] 16:32, 17 June 2011 (CDT)

== Team Specific Weapons? ==

Looking at the AKS-74U pictures it looks scarily like that's a US Marine using it on Spetsnaz. As far as I know there'll be unlockables and selectable weapons, but does anyone know if these are team specific or not? I'm personally pretty worried we're going to have a bunch of marines in state of the art gear running around with AK rifles because a bunch of bars say they're the best, or PLR using M4s and 249's, that's as bad, if not worse. --[[User:AmrasCalmacil|AmrasCalmacil]] 17:26, 17 June 2011 (CDT)

:That's only in MP, it's the same as Bad Company 2, I never liked being restricted to team weapons im MP. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]]

:The player could've picked the weapon up... We don't know for sure about faction specific loadouts. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 23:54, 17 June 2011 (CDT)

::I personally liked the faction specific loadouts in BF2, it was realistic. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:40, 18 June 2011 (CDT)

:True, to be honest I'd be happy either way. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 03:49, 18 June 2011 (CDT)

:I hope they bring back faction specific weapons from Battlefield 2. Medal of Honor made it right at first but then you got the opposing faction's guns and faction-specificness pretty much lost its purpose :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:28, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

::But in BF2 if you killed a enemy you can pick up his "kit" and use his weapons... - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 14:08, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

:::Yes, first you had to kill an enemy, then you could pick his stuff (kit). But for Battlefield 3 it should be weapon (more realistic than insta-crossdressing xD ) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 16:12, 19 June 2011 (CDT)
::::Your right, lol. XD - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:25, 19 June 2011 (CDT)
:::Actually in BC2 your character model never changed when you swaped kits, you could have a medic carrying a sniper rifle, or a ghillie guy with an RPG-7. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:49, 19 June 2011 (CDT)
::::Ah right, I forgot. :\
:::::Lol, you forgot about rocket launcher-wielding snipers ;) Hey, we should put a pic of that under the rocket section or something, you know, just for kicks. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:05, 20 June 2011 (CDT)
::::::lol yeah. The reason I don't remember is because I only played with bots, I only had Dial-up back then. u_u - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 14:34, 20 June 2011 (CDT)

I hope its not side specific, I always hated that considering how two weapons from the same class where completely different and handled different. Most people would end up using unlocked guns that you can use on either side. If you want a game thats realistic as possible, play Operation Flashpoint.

:Being a fan of Battlefield 2, which featured faction specific weapons, I'm offended someone is saying me to play another game. I might as well say: If you want a game thats unrealistic as possible, play Call of Duty. By the way, in Medal of Honor opposing factions' weapons had identical stats, so that wouldn't be a problem for Battlefield 3 (probably). Also, sign your posts (paragraphs?) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:52, 23 June 2011 (CDT)

::Well since OpFor is using a AK-74M and AKS-74U which is some-what comparable to the M16A4 and M4A1, I say the game is gonna be fairly balanced. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 12:47, 23 June 2011 (CDT)
::: If they use weapon balance from MoH then yes. Because in BF2 M16A2 and M4A1 kinda sucked (better use G36E and SCAR-L unlocks, respectively). However AK-101 and AKS-74U were ''nice'' (damage)! Check their stats here: [http://wiki.bf2s.com/weapons/comparison BF2 Weapons Comparison] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:40, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

:^^But those games kinda sucked (at least Dragon Rising, Red River looks good). :\ Whatever, I personally like faction specific weapons for my reasons above. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 14:27, 22 June 2011 (CDT)

::To be honest, Dragon Rising didn't suck, it was just buggy and laggy (which can be said about pretty much every other shooter, at least as start) and didn't have weapon customization (which can be said about Battlefield 2). In my opinion it is Red River which sucked, basically being Co-op CoD:MW with Visible Walls of Block being replaced by Invisible Walls of Doom and auto regeneration being replaced by manual healing. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:52, 23 June 2011 (CDT)

:::Meh, that's why I said ''kinda'' sucky, lol I heard AAII is much worst, as its severely buggy and lacks weapon animations and others. P.S. I prefer manual healing over mutant regenerating health any day, the only place 3 second regenerating health belongs is a Wolverine game. :\ - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 12:47, 23 June 2011 (CDT)
::::To be honest, manual healing in Red River isn't ''that'' much different from auto regeneration: hold "use" key while not getting hit and several seconds later you are good to go. Whether Dragon Rising had an actual Medic class just like Battlefield :) Oh, and it's kinda hard to make complex game without ''a lot'' of technical problems and unfinished things, yes ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:40, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

Also, if you want actual realism at this point, you go ArmA 2, not Operation Flashpoint: We-screwed-over-an-already-great-franchise-by-making-a-game-with-casual-gamers-in-mind[[User:5t3v0|5t3v0]] 03:06, 24 June 2011 (CDT)
:If you want actual realism at this point, you go to Army. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:40, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

::Ugh, But ArmA II had NO weapon animations, that's kinda a big "unfinished thing" when you publish the game! And you Mr. Masterius, your obnoxious, why don't ''you'' go join the Army. We're talking about wanting realistic combat games not what peoples career decisions should be. -_- [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 13:04, 24 June 2011 (CDT)
:::Mr. Wolf, one thing you should realise: until Virtual Reality is created and gone into mass production, games will never, NEVER be trully realistic. Holding gun in your hands =\= Mouse+Keyboard. Also, mine is not obnoxious, mine is very nice and tidy :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 14:36, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

::::And what's so wrong with wanting realism in "Mouse+Keyboard" games? Also I have handled, extensively trained, and fired many REAL firearms, so I'm not just some armchair-commando or a mall-ninja. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:18, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

:Eventually FPSs will be the player wearing a mocap suit with a mocap gun, in a mocap room with a floor that moves (like a treadmill) so you can run places. And you will be forced to reload the weapon properly etc. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:25, 24 June 2011 (CDT)
::The first steps are made :D [http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/xio-ultimate-fps-virtual-reality-gaming-exoskeleton-prototype-video-21-04-2011/ XIO Gaming VR Simulator Prototype] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:54, 25 June 2011 (CDT)
:::I'd settle for having a decent field of view, right now. They're actually getting narrower rather than wider as the gun attempts to colonise roughly a quarter of the screen. Kinda sad when the guy in ''Doom'' held his pistol in a more sensible way than the guy in ''Crysis 2'' does; the latter seems to be holding it with the base of his right palm rested against his nose. Sure, we're not all going to own an IMAX globe theatre any time soon to have a full 180 degrees or so of vision, but it gets silly when your FOV is ~30 degrees these days when most of the old shooters did 70-90. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:08, 11 July 2011 (CDT)

:I removed your post? Maybe we both tried to edit at the same time, because it wasn't there when I did, sorry about that. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:34, 25 June 2011 (CDT)

Lol @ me. Should have known someone was going to say that... Should have added "In a Video game"... [[User:5t3v0|5t3v0]] 08:00, 25 June 2011 (CDT)
:Right 8) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:51, 25 June 2011 (CDT)

::It's alright, danke. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:31, 25 June 2011 (CDT)

==More Stuff==
Maybe. I didn't see anything listed here that we don't have, but they seem to know what they're talking about. (Near the bottom)
http://enterbf3.com/
[[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:17, 4 July 2011 (CDT)

== Barrett MRAD/98B spotted ==

Taken from the "Classes Explained" screenshot...

[http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x80/cowboyw54/Bf3render.jpg]

source:
[http://bf3blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/bf3-classes.jpg]

--[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 18:07, 5 July 2011 (CDT)

:Cool, I'd never heard of that rifle before, looks like a good addition. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:37, 5 July 2011 (CDT)

:Looks like they call Picatinny Railed M16A4 '''M16A2''' ''again'' *facepalm*. Oh, and that's a weird sniper rifle. Don't they have '''M110''' for that?
:P.S. And yeah, same goes for '''DAO-12''' (Armsel Striker, duh!). But I would prefer '''Armsel Protecta''' (it's more modern after all ;) ) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:01, 7 July 2011 (CDT)
::Actually they are calling it '''M-16a2'''... nuff said! - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 05:14, 7 July 2011 (CDT)
:::If it was called "Blarg Rifle" but had correct reloads, I'd be happy. Where did it say they called it an A2 anyway? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:03, 7 July 2011 (CDT)
::::[http://bf3blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/bf3-classes.jpg here] [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:50, 7 July 2011 (CDT)
:::::Oh right, well, it might say "M-16a2", but it calls the MRAD a "Mk. II" Sniper Rifle, so, we'll see. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:19, 7 July 2011 (CDT)

Well I think that the "Mk. II" is the Mk II Mod 0 (SR-25), and that they just threw the text on there because the Mk II will be the default Recon rifle.
Anyways, I think this 99% confirms that it will be in the game, should it be added to the main page?
--[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 14:28, 10 July 2011 (CDT)

:OH Mk.11, I thought it said Mk.2, and I couldn't figure out what the hell that would be. Yeah, we've seen the SR-25 already in that multiplayer footage, and everything in that video was default. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:05, 10 July 2011 (CDT)

==Notes about in-game ACOG scopes==

I noticed that there seem to be two separate models of ACOG scopes available in the game, according to the screenshots posted in the article. The M4A1 carbine the player character uses in the 'Faultline' trailer is fitted with a camo-painted TA01NSN ACOG(identifiable by the integral iron sights and lack of a fiber-optic strip along the top) while one of the M16A4's shown in first-person view in the article here is equipped with a TA31F ACOG. This is the second FPS game I've seen to do this, the other being ''[[Project Reality]]'' (itself a mod of ''[[Battlefield 2]]'', coincidentally) which has the TA31F and TA31RCO ACOG models available in it. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 03:44, 11 July 2011 (CDT)

:...While in the average FPS, you're lucky if the thing called the ACOG looks like anything in Trijicon's product line. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:47, 11 July 2011 (CDT)

::Making the public in general think every scope is called an ACOG :P Also, in terms of 4x sights, theres the M249s ELCAN, and I'm hoping you can put any optic on anything. One of the DICE guys said there's a crazy amount of optics in BF3. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:26, 11 July 2011 (CDT)

:::Even in COD: Black Ops (a game that takes place in the 60s mind you) they have a scope called a ACOG, even though it's obviously ''not'' a ACOG *rolls eyes*. Game Devs are becoming fails more and more every year. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 17:08, 11 July 2011 (CDT)

::::Treyarch basically made their own Modern Warfare, with blackjack and hookers. So yeah, forget about proper portray of Cold War. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:41, 13 July 2011 (CDT)

:::Give me the ability to slap the Elcan onto the M240 and I will be happy. Hope what you said about the 'crazy amount of optics' turns out to be true. --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 06:34, 11 July 2011 (CDT)

:::I hope you're not confusing the ELCAN scope with the similar M145 MGO. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 12:05, 11 July 2011 (CDT)

::::You are correct, I did mean the MGO. I know the M145 is different, I just though the Elcan name was interchangeable. --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 13:15, 11 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::It would be nice to see a broader array of optics customizations in FPS games. ''Project Reality'' has a pretty good variety, but you have to switch out your entire class loadout in order to change this, and most weapons only have 1 or 2 optics available aside from iron sights (the M4A1 has the widest variety; having available EOTech, M68 Aimpoint, Kimber Mepro, & ITL MARS red dots as well as both TA31F & TA31RCO ACOGs as mentioned above). [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 12:05, 11 July 2011 (CDT)

Now, that Project Reality has been mentioned... I hope DICE won't disappoint the CIS players, so that we can kick yer capitalist arses in proper way... j/k lol :P Anyway, here are the articles for those interested: [http://ra.spetsnaz.su/wiki/1P29 for AK-74M] and [http://ra.spetsnaz.su/wiki/PKP for PKP]. And the [http://www.npzoptics.com/catalog/sights_for_small_arms/ full catalog]. Oh, and it's been suggested on [http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-3/1405448-optics-lots-optics-2.html#post19418223 EA's Forums], so I don't have to do it myself. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:24, 11 July 2011 (CDT)

== Mocap Guns ==
Here's a challenge for everyone; what are the two wire guns standing in for?

2nd Story
http://www.enterbf3.com/

Or if it's off the list after a while:
http://media.enterbf3.com/images/mcnab1.jpg
http://media.enterbf3.com/images/mcnab2.jpg [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:29, 15 July 2011 (CDT)

Cornershot and a Thompson with M203? :P [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:35, 15 July 2011 (CDT)

:lolz. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 02:51, 15 July 2011 (CDT)

More seriously, that thing McNab has is definately supposed to be a carbine with an underbarrel accessory, I can't really see what else it could be. The other guy's weapon is a bit more of a mystery; since it doesn't have any kind of projection for a magazine, I'd guess it's something like a Bizon; can't be a P90, these rigs are for capturing hand positions and his would be completely wrong for that. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:36, 15 July 2011 (CDT)

:Wait, actually it does have a magazine, I see a curved MP5-style mag just in front of his finger. So, maybe it's an MP5 with some underbarrel device making the front end all chunky, or one of those MP10 things like in GTAIV. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:40, 15 July 2011 (CDT)

LOL Tommy with M203 :) The one on the right really looks like an M14 EBR to me, the mag, handguard, and barrel, but the other one is weird. It looks like an MP5 pistol grip and mag, with a really bulky front, and a stock that looks familiar, bu I just can't place. :P [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:09, 15 July 2011 (CDT)

: [http://riflestocks.com/store/product2.html ACE side-folding skeleton stock]? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:48, 15 July 2011 (CDT)

::Yeah, that's the one! Hmm, is there anything in particular that's on, aftermarket or otherwise? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:29, 15 July 2011 (CDT)

:::Quick google gets me mostly AK-pattern weapons. AK, Saiga, Galil, that kind of thing. Couple on MACs, not that it's likely to be one of those. Maybe that's what a MoCap AKS-74U looks like? :s [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:36, 15 July 2011 (CDT)

::::I'd say that's the best guess so far [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:13, 15 July 2011 (CDT)

::::Dunno, such a stock shape reminds me of [http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:G36.jpg G36E] which was in Battlefield 2 (with railz instead of optics). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:35, 18 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::Not sure about that, you'd have thought if it was G36E the mocap prop would have a rod or something stuck to the end to represent the rest of the barrel like the one McNab has. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:44, 18 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::Bah, I am not really into guessing the gun by the mocap. Details of it - OK, but generally it's just a mishmash that can be used for anything provided the grip is adequate xD --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:51, 18 July 2011 (CDT)

Actually the ACE stock is found on the SPAS 15 as well (which was in Bad Company 1, and Battlefield 2 I think) probably the most likely choice. --[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 18:48, 18 July 2011 (CDT)

:I hope it's that, that was the ONLY weapon that didn't come back in BC2 for some reason. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:44, 18 July 2011 (CDT)

::But it returned in [[Battlefield Play4Free#Franchi SPAS-15|Battlefield Play4Free]] so its appearance in BF3 is possible ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 23:20, 18 July 2011 (CDT)

== Glock 17 unlock spotted ==

... in a promotional shot from Dice about their Battlelog service

[http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x599/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/2.jpg]

--[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 13:02, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

:It was also seen in the EA Pwned video, along with the G3 (mentioned), I forgot to add that. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:06, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

::I hope this Glock 17 actually holds... well... 17 rounds. :P - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 17:24, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

:::Well, the MP-443 does, so that could work, I'm thinking there's gonna be a Euro faction, with the Glock as the sidearm, and we've also seen the P90. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:17, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

::::Now that reminds me... Battlefield 2: Modern Combat (console version of Battlefield 2) had [[ Battlefield 2: Modern Combat#Glock 17 Pistol|Glock 17]] as Euro Sidearm :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:44, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::It did? Awesome! I was just guessing, but that basically confirms it :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 03:54, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::Here's some leaked gameplay for you guys, skip to 1:44, there's your Glock. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfeOoEDYEt0) Would appear that the sidearms (at least) are not faction specific. Also looks like it holds 18 rounds but I'm assuming this is a '+1' affair. [[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 05:00, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::::Melee Animation is good :D Reloading after every bullet isn't :| --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:48, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

== Alpha Footage ==

no doubt some of you have heard there is a closed alpha trial going on, and some of you may have watched the leaked footage online. i dont want to post links to these videos just incase its not aloud.
but i can tell you, that the G36c, Glock 17, M27 IAR, SV98, MP7 and M1014 are in. --[[User:Sike|Sike]] 08:24, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:Closed Alpha? Any news about Closed Beta for MoH: Limited Edition owners? It should be before Open Beta, shouldn't it? :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:41, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:A pretty nice selection of weapons appearing which is good to see, particularly the M27. Now just need someone to spot the L85 and I'll be happy \o/ --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 11:19, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

::I guess it, Russian counterpart to M27 is going to be RPK-74M :O And British - L86? ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:41, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:::You may possibly be right, and I hope you are. If it's in there, first person to deliver the information wins a shiny medal from myself :o --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 12:48, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

::::looks like US support starts with the M27, and the Russians start with RPK, british forces arent in the game... --[[User:Sike|Sike]] 13:58, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::The existence of other factions hasn't been denied (to my knowledge) but even so I hope either weapon is available --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 15:02, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::Germans aren't in the game and there's a G36C. We can't rule anything out. Plus, there's always the possibility of DLC. [[User:Halorocka888|Halorocka888]] 19:31, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::::New factions/weapons added via DLC would be grand. --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 19:50, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::::Yeah, like they did with Euro Forces Pack for Battlefield 2 :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:37, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

:I've yanked the images off the page; as with the MW3 stuff, posting images from leaks is not allowed. Wait until they show up in something official. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:16, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::Why does it even matter? We should post everything about everything we know... :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:36, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

:::Same reason we don't allow pirated or leaked movie footage; using that kind of thing reflects badly on the site. We can wait until these weapons are confirmed in official materials (which they will be in due course, I'm sure), we don't need to go using dubious sources. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:39, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::::Yeah, for a sec it slipped my mind that once the game is out we will have everything :P [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 03:21, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::::And there are still screencaps from leaked version :O --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:37, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::Which ones? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:30, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::The ones added by Gran28 - check page history. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:41, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::::Oh, I thought where he said "Paris gameplay video" he was talking about a gameplay video released at some show in Paris. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:49, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::::The ones that I added was from a gameplay trailer released by DICE yesterday I think.--[[User:Gran28|Gran28]] 08:04, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::::::Ah, if that's so, then my bad. Kinda hard to separate official ones from current leaks. Better mention that on the talk page :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:28, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

== New Official MP Trailer ==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emwEknzmyRo

can see a M4 with a Eotech and a Acog, and the front site is in when optics are attached.--[[User:Sike|Sike]] 08:32, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

== Possible return of the NDM-86 ==
I was watching this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MgQMoPwGwM&feature=related and around 1:13-14, I thought I saw the pattern found on the straight mags that the 7.62mm NATO variant of the NDM-86 uses.
EDIT: Okay at 1:15 at the maximum quality, I could clearly see that magazine is straight. This is no SVD guys, no SVD. --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 18:09, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:Good spot, wouldn't have noticed that myself. I wonder why they opted for the NDM-86 instead of the SVD? I assume the SVD is harder to get in Sweden meaning the studio had to find an alternative. Is it still labeled as an SVD within the game? --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 19:52, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

::It is, and it was in MoH. You know, I think MoH was like a super pre-Alpha version of this game, there's and MP7 too, and a few others. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:03, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:::I hope DICE do a better job on BF3 than they did on MoH, that game was shocking. There's probably some truth in that though :P --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 20:43, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

::::Well, MoH multi was made by a small team from DICE in 6-7 months, and ALL of DICE has been working on BF3 for, like, 5 years, I'm not worried ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:52, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::Fair play to them but you'd have thought issues with the game would have been patched following the game's release. Still, I don't deny that BF3 will be a far better game however I'm sure some of the issues from MoH will poke through. --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 03:21, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::Well, we can hope the issues that poke through don't include those godawful skyboxes that MoH had. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:26, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::DICE deliberately sabotaged MoH MP 'cause they were focused on BC2... :( But it is said that MoH 2 is being developed solely by DC. And it is rumored that MoH 2 will have Frostbite 2 Engine :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:50, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

:::Would be interesting to see what DC do with the Frostbite 2 engine, I wasn't all that impressed with the single player but taking into account that (as far as I'm aware) MoH was the studio's first game, it was an adequate effort. Was better than the multiplayer at least, in my opinion. --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 07:20, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::::I've always said that if MoH's MP was the same as it SP, then the MP would be awesome, I have it just for the SP :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 08:35, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::Just played some more of SP and I have to say I agree, pretty intense stuff. --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 11:38, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

== Default Weapons ==
I just noticed that all of the US weapons are Armalites, and all of the Russian weapons are Kalashnikovs, it's cool. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:58, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

:Aside from the 'SVD' which isn't a Kalashnikov design, but we'll forgive you as it is outwardly similar. --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 03:16, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::True, but you got the point ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 03:21, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::[http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/sniper/sn18/svd_clones.jpg SVD Clones]. The third one is AK modified to SVD. Ain't Russian guns :P --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:58, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

:::I do like the fact that each faction has it's own starting weaponry, I always liked that about BF2 (though I didn't play it much) --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 03:25, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

::::Agreed :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:58, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

== AS Val ==
I can't find the video, but I'll post a link: http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/7447261.page [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:31, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

:Cool! =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 22:20, 22 July 2011 (CDT)

== Sniper Rifles can have iron sights ==
Yup. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:04, 23 July 2011 (CDT)

:Hmmm. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:56, 23 July 2011 (CDT)

== M1014 ==
It's hard to tell because of the screwed up animation in the alpha, but you load a round into the chamber first, then the tube. EDIT: This is a good thing, I made sound like it wasn't :O [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:32, 23 July 2011 (CDT)

== M16A4 ==
It fires semi, burst, AND auto, one of those fancy 360 degree fire selects or something :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:32, 23 July 2011 (CDT)

== New Alpha Gameplay ==

In the gameplay, I noticed that the front sights are still present when optics are attached, that M16A4 is now burst-fire and that the US LMG is called M249 in-game. Bipod gameplay was shown too. I also spotted the M-416 at 0:55, maybe the M4A1 equivalent of the enemy forces? [[User:Gonzaga|Gonzaga]] 18:45, 24 July 2011 (CDT)

:Okay, yeah, they made it so the front sight is there, but disappears when aiming, the M16 has burst as well as auto (and semi), and the HK416 is an unlock, ONLY the default weapons are faction based, anyone can use unlocks, but the default ones might be usable by anyone later or something though. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:42, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

::That's still much better than the MW games. Boy, you complain more about games than I do. :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 02:19, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

::Defaults faction / unlocks not is how BFs 2 and 2142 worked, too. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:08, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

:I'm not complaining, I actually like the front sight disappearing system, if it's not there the gun wouldn't work, but if it was, then having an RDS would give you a better field of view. The M16's fire modes aren't too bad, as long as the weapons have the right ammo count, reload properly, and have +1 I'm happy. Things like the player loading it fancy or whatever are okay. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:56, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

== M320 Standalone confirmed ==
This. Search "BF3 Grenade Launcher", and the vid has a G3 with an ACOG too. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:56, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

== SIG 550 pretty much confirmed by Demize ==
http://twitter.com/#!/Demize99/status/30377608852017152 [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:56, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

== A Few Weapon Vids ==
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuoU7uBNvP0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LILgS-M2xo

Here's most everything in action, and with a few attachments. I love how the description for the M145 mentions the Canadian Army! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:37, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

:Looking good so far, spotted some people on my Steam friends list playing the alpha. So jealous. :( --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 10:43, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

::I'm looking very forward to this game. :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 13:42, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

:::Video Confirms new weapons for the game, as available in alpha build. In the first video we see an MP-7 PDW at 1:14, M1911 pistol at 1:57, RPK light machinegun on killfeed at 3:21, M27 IAR in killfeed at 6:12, M1014 shotgun at 7:34, G3 battlerifle on killfeed at 8:29, G36c assault rifle at 12:15, M320 grenade launcher on killfeed at 13:16. In the 2nd video we see RPK selection and model at 6:07 (usage following). Someone please update main page accordingly.--[[User:DaiTaNam|DaiTaNam]] 15:32, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

::::Good of you to find everything, but leaked stuff isn't going on the main page :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:25, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

::::: awww =(, thanks though.--[[User:DaiTaNam|DaiTaNam]] 17:39, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::Sigh, The M145 uses the M4 reticle over the M249/240 reticle :( --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 17:47, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::::That's the reticle my (standard version) ELCAN replica has on my airsoft C7A2, do you mean the M145 version is supposed to have a different one? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:40, 25 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::::[http://www.dsarms.com/images/ELCM145M4W.gif Elcan M145 Optical Sight for M4 and M249/M240]. Remember people, this is just leaked Alpha and DICE will ''probably'' make changes to the game to make it right... Oh, and RPK :| --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:53, 26 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::::::Oh I see. And what do you mean, oh and the RPK? What's wrong with it? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:07, 26 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::::::Has the wrong bipod at the moment, doesn't look like the barrel is long enough to be an RPK either --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 05:31, 26 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::::::Well... since it has both synthetic furniture and curved magazine, it is [http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/machine/mg15/rpkm.jpg RPKM] (ignore the magazine color). However in-game description mentions that it uses 5.45x39 ammo, which is used in [http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/machine/mg16/rpk74_02.jpg RPK-74M] that is actually used by Russian Forces. So the point is, DICE should change the magazine model and rename the weapon to '''RPK-74M''' for Russians. That Militia can use whatever they want. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:36, 26 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::::::::I didn't know that, so the curvature of the magazine in an AK/RPK-style weapon can be used to identify the caliber? DICE have clearly given alpha invites to the wrong people, should have gone to the inhabitants of IMFDB. --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 05:42, 26 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::::::::: :D And yeah. The curve gradation for Kalashnikovs' magazines goes as follows: 5.56 < 5.45 < 7.62, with 7.62 curve being particularly distinguishable ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:28, 26 July 2011 (CDT)

::::::::::::::You learn something new everyday, now I can complain that the BF3 RPK is incorrect >:O --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 06:33, 26 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::::::::::I sent Demize a tweet (I made a Twitter accout JUST to send him stuff) that the RPK should be either the RPKM or RPK-74M (as I can't see the mags well enough), and also sent him another one saying the G3 should be the G3A3 :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:42, 26 July 2011 (CDT)

:::::::::::::That is dedication to informing the developer their game is wrong, well played. I also sent him a tweet concerning the M145's reticle. --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 18:30, 26 July 2011 (CDT)

== 1911 spotted ==

I just watched a video and the 1911 is back. This game's version appears to be the MEU model. I can tell from the slide, sights, and hammer. It appears to be the old model with the Springfield Armory slide. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 23:53, 26 July 2011 (CDT)

Talk:Falling Skies

2011-06-29T07:14:18Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Maggie's 1911 */ new section

According to the web comics the sidearm of Thomas Mason is a .45 Para-Ordnance Nite-Tac.[[User:Fitz175|Fitz175]] 07:44, 30 April 2011 (CDT)

Somebody, Anthony I think, has a Berreta 92 INOX.--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 09:33, 20 June 2011 (CDT)

Maggie ([[Sarah Carter]]) has a Colt Model 733 or 933, couldn't make out the handle. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:25, 20 June 2011 (CDT)

Which one was she?--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 20:10, 20 June 2011 (CDT)
It looks like an M733--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 20:20, 20 June 2011 (CDT)

There was also a PKM and an RPK used by the "good guys" against the outlaws at the end. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:04, 21 June 2011 (CDT)

== Mason's Type 56-1 ==

Does anyone know what Mason has on the stock of his T56-1? It looks like some sort of tape or something. I'm assuming it's to make it a bit more comfortable to fire from the shoulder. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 18:24, 23 June 2011 (CDT)

Looks like duct tape to me. Adds a little pading to the meatl stock.--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 08:34, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

The tape effectively turns the back of the stock into more of a oval butt plate rather than a hollow U shape. Unfortunately, this would also mean that it would be impossible to unfold/fold the stock with the magazine in place. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:45, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

I did think to myself that it would obstruct the folding of the stock. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 14:31, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

== Clip vs. Mag ==

Just watching it now and that was the first time I've seen someone get corrected on calling a magazine a clip in a film or TV programme ever. Nice little touch. So far this series has a lot of promise. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 18:29, 23 June 2011 (CDT)

== Maggie's 1911 ==

I caught a re-run of the premier episode and after getting a good look at it, I'm pretty sure that Maggie's 1911 is a Colt Gold Cup National match judging by the sights and slide serrations. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 02:14, 29 June 2011 (CDT)

User:ShootingLiberal

2011-03-01T02:50:23Z

ShootingLiberal: Removing all content from page

Talk:Call of Juarez: The Cartel

2011-03-01T02:49:57Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Just a thought */

==MAC-10==
I just checked the the official website of this game and he is definitely holding a suppressed [[Steyr TMP]] and not a MAC-10. - [[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]]

== How many games have featured Ciudad Juarez, Mexico now? ==

Back in the days of [[Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2]] which featured that city as a terrorist hotspot, supposedly the Mayor of Ciudad Juarez at the time claimed it was going to scare tourists away from that city (which is kind of funny given what's going on there now). José Reyes of Chihuahua (a state in Mexico) also called for the game's banning in Mexico.

I can't help but wonder if this game will stir up controversy again. Still, I think Mexico's past the stage now where they can try to pretend that a negative fictional portrayal of their cities or other locations in their country will actually be far worse than what's happening there now . . . --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 02:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I remember that about GRAW. The governor of Chihuahua ordered the game seized by authorities if sold on Mexican soil. They really do need to be more concerned with the ''reality'' of the country rather than some game company's fiction set in it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:03, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

==Unknown Pistol and AK==
I found a bigger picture through Google, and I believe it's a Beretta M9, or some variant. It looks like the AK is either an AK-74, or an AKM. - [[User:1morey]], February 13, 2011 9:20 AM (EST).
:That AK variant has to be an AK-47; it has a milled receiver and lacks a slanted compensator. -[[User:Deafmatch|Deafmatch]] 15:52, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
::That's ''milled'' receiver. ;) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:04, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
:::I'll just pretend that never happened. -[[User:Deafmatch|Deafmatch]] 17:51, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
::::We'll keep it between you, me, and anyone who reads this page. :P [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 08:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

==controversial already==

Seen multiple news articles condemning this game, just makes me want it more now.

I can see why, the original Call of Juarez-es were westerns and were pretty much the only videogame FPS-es to gain any sort of acclaim. Taking it into the present kills what was it's main selling point, although I did enjoy the second one and will probably pick it up when the price goes down. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]]

==Just a thought==
I don't want to sound like a jerk but there is no such thing as a "Beretta M92FS". It is "M9" or "92FS", bus since there will be no U.S. Military in this game (probably) it should be 92FS. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 21:23, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Also on the topic of Berettas, the gun listed as a Desert Eagle is definately a two-tone Beretta 92FS [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 02:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk:L.A. Noire

2011-01-29T19:07:36Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Star Model B */

== Facial Expressions ==
I've got to say, the facial expressions I've seen for this game are amazingly realistic. I hear you have to do a lot of interrogations and that facial emotions are a big part. --[[User:FirearmsNewbie|FirearmsNewbie]] 05:18, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

== Star Model B ==
As seen in [http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110106233345/lanoire/images/2/29/Screen_shot_34.jpg this screenshot], the weapon that the protagonist uses is a [[Star Model B]], not a Colt M1911. Presumably the weapon designers got access to a movie armory, and subsequently mapped the trademarks off a Star (preferred by movie armorers due to its reliability when cycling 9mm blanks) rather than a Colt. 
[[User:MiPod|MiPod]] 21:34, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
:''"preferred by movie armorers due to its reliability when cycling 9mm blanks rather than a Colt."'' That might have been the case.. in the 70s. Since the mid 80s a better .45 acp blank was developed for use with pistols such as the 1911, prior to this .45 acp blanks were made from cut down .30-06 cases that had hard rifle primers. Other than Pulp Fiction which is old now anyways, do you ever see a Star Model B in a new film? It is cool that they went with the Star rather than the standard Colt 1911. --[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 21:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
::It doesn't have an external extractor, so I think that the game designers chose the name Star for the in-game gun so that they wouldn't have to pay Colt for naming rights, but I don't think that they are aware of the Star Model B. But thats just what I think --[[User:Jackbel|Jackbel]] 21:58, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Well a couple things to add in addition to what Jackbel mentioned. It says Cal .45 on the slide, so that would make it a model P, if it is a Star at all. In addition the dev company's name is Rock*star* games, so they probably used the last half "Star" as a generic name and/ or a nod to themselves.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 22:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
:haha, just noticed that --[[User:Jackbel|Jackbel]] 22:22, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
::Ah! I didn't even think of that. However, you can just see the Star emblem behind the word "STAR" on the slide in that picture, so it seems to me that the "Star" is intentional. Also, the two lines of writing, one above the other, in front of the Star name matches the trademarks on a real Star. [[User:MiPod|MiPod]] 00:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a hybrid gun if anything. Sure it has the Star markings but there is a noticeable lack of the external extractor, also that gun has no bushing. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 19:07, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:The Departed

2010-12-01T20:07:40Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Nicholson Used A Real Gun? */

==Damons P226 a Sig P228?==
According to http://www.propstore.com/products.htm?movieIdForm=1455&productsKeywordSearchform=&pageNum=&show_all_items_form=&isSubmitSearch=0&isNewAdditions=0&isArchive=0&categoryIdForm=0&genreIdForm=0&productsSortType=0&recordsPerPage=100

and

http://www.propstore.com/img/products/1455/Damon_SIG228_3.jpg

Damon's gun is a P228. Not a P226.

:I've been trying to figure this out myself. PropStore is selling the P228, but in the movie, Damon's gun clearly has the longer barrel and squared trigger guard of the P226. It's possible that armory which supplied the guns was short on 226s and had to use a 228 as a back-up weapon (all "hero" guns on movie sets have a back-up double). But as best I can tell, the only SIGs that appear on-screen in ''The Departed'' are 226s. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 13:09, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

The Image is called Damon_SIG228_3, nothing refering to THIS movie. Could this be a prop from the Bourne movies, didnt he use a 228 in that?

:If you go to the web site, Prop Store claims it was used by Damon in this movie, even though I'm not sure where (he only uses 226s on-screen, as far as I can tell). As for the Bourne movies, he uses SIG Pros in the first and last movies, and a P225 in the second. No P228s. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 17:57, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
::The description of the item does describe it as a P226 though. Maybe they're just using the wrong pictures. The pistol in the movie stills is clearly not the same gun as in the detail shots. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 18:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay though, http://nranews.com/#/news/VideoModule/Handguns%20Used%20By%20All%20Star%20Cast%20Of%20Gangster%20Film.xml
:Oh come on, you'd think these guys of all people who be able to distinguish a P226 and a P228. And "silencer?" I KNOW this guy knows what's he's talking about too. He's been on "Tales of the Gun" many times. (And he's kind of let himself go.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:09, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Other pics of it:

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/03/26/guns-from-the-departed-movie/

== Infernal Affairs rip off ==

I'm not saying the Departed is a bad movie and they even said they based the main villain boss off a real crook, but I seriously doubt these events were based on anything real. Everything about it is exactly the same as Infernal Affair, except the very last scene of the movie. If you saw the Departed first and then saw the Chinese movie, you'd think the Chinese ripped off a great American movie, but it's entirely the other way around. I'm not going to argue which is superior. They are both good movies since they both told the same story well, just that the Chinese did it first and made a sequel and a prequel out of it. I just want to put down my two cents about this fact. The people behind the movie Departed admitting a bit that their source was a legally acquired "remake" doesn't mean anything. There are remakes, reboots and then there's frame by frame thief. The Departed isn't a bad movie, but that's because it's the same thing of an already good Chinese movie. I mean they even did the same thing in both movies in hiring 2 very well known actors of their respective countries. If the audience sees 2 top actors in their movie, then it must win awards [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:29, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

:I completely agree that this is a virtual shot-for-shot remake of ''[[Infernal Affairs]]'' only grittyer, however, I seem to recall reading that Martin Scorsese bought the rights to remake IA as an American film. As long as he doesn't try to claim that this was his original idea, I don't see any problem with this being a remake. -[[User:Anonymous|Anonymous]]

::The fact that it was a remake was no secret, and it was even announced on Oscar night when it won best picture that it was a remake, although they messed up and referred to the original as a Japanese movie, instead of a Hong Kong movie. And for the record, I think the original IA was better. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:55, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

That is what hollywood does now...they cant make their own movie so they have gone out into the world and start to remake their hard earned movie. Look at "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". The movie was just put out in 2009 by europe and now hollywood wants to make it again with Daniel Craig and whatever hot american chick they can find. Hollywood wants to remake oldboy...which they should keep their greedy little hands off of because the original is mind blowing. Then lets not forget Death at a Funeral which was a funny movie all and all and it came out in 2007, then hollywood thought they would make a american black version not even two years later and didnt even have the respect for the British Version to replace the midget with another actor, they are that lame with non-originalism they didnt change one thing in the movie almost word for word scene for scene. [[Spades of Columbia]]

And it gets worse. I tried to show a buddy of mine who really liked Departed, showed him Infernal Affair and he liked the Departed more solely because he saw it first. If he saw Infernal Affairs first, then he'd like that and call the Departed a rip off. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I really liked both Infernal Affairs and The Departed. But when I watched The Departed, I pretty much laughed whenever someone drops an F bomb.

I think some people preferred ''The Departed'' because, even though the two films have identical plots, the subtlety of the Chinese criminals in ''Infernal Affairs'' gives the film a slightly slower pace than the more flamboyant Irish criminals of ''The Departed'' gave to their respective movie.
:I liked the subtleties. IA had better character development. Departed wrapped everything up a little too neatly. (And speaking of wrapping everything up a little too neatly, check out the Red Chinese ending, [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWT04Wkwtb4] Roughly translated, the police say they've uncovered that he's working for gangsters, and they take him away. And that's it.)--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:31, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

::I'm not saying the subtleties are bad, however, there are some people who have shorter attention spans and prefer a quicker paced film. Also I did see the alternate ending and thought it was sort of a ''Deus ex Machina'' deal. I never knew that it was developed specifically for mainland China. Do all Honk Kong films have to have alternate "Communist Friendly" endings? Also, if the Mainland version used the alternate ending, what happened in ''[[Infernal Affairs 3]]'' when the truth came out?
:::I don't know if they do that for every movie, but IA was unusual in which all the good guys died and the bad guy walked away completely unscathed. I can see why the communists wouldn't want that message coming across. And the sequels didn't feel like they were planned out in advance, more like the original made lots of money and they were trying to cash in. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 12:47, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm Chinese, but I was born and raised in America, so I understand the cultural differences, but basically the plot is the exact same, the lines are almost the same. The girlfriend plot is the same. The old cop, etc. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:25, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

== Nicholson Used A Real Gun? ==

"For their climactic showdown at a Boston bar in the Best Picture-winning The Departed, Jack Nicholson decided to raise the stakes a bit on co-star Leonardo DiCaprio. According to a new book and an interview with director Martin Scorsese, Nicholson pulled a real gun and threatened DiCaprio with it -- a gun DiCaprio knew was real... and probably loaded."

http://www.nerve.com/news/movies/jack-nicholson-pulled-real-gun-on-leonardo-dicaprio-during-the-departed-shooting

If it is true, then that is a very unprofessional and what the fuck moment. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I doubt it's true. If it is the film's weapons master really fell asleep at the wheel. -[[User:Anonymous|Anonymous]]

I think it's a possibility. I think in the Deer Hunter something similar happened. De Niro put a live round into a gun to make the scene more tense [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 20:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Dead Rising 2

2010-10-02T16:19:27Z

ShootingLiberal: /* The Handgun */ new section

==Chuck's odd gun holding==
While I was playing Dead Rising 2: Case 0 today, i notice something odd. When Chuck's aiming the Handgun, his thumb or one finger (can't quite tell) is in a truly odd position: its basically pointing up! I wish i had a pic of it to show you, but i dont have a way of taking clear HQ pics of my Xbox 360 [[User:SeanWolf]]
Do you mean the odd way he grips the front grip? Its not wierd it's just old way of holding a gun no one does that now

== The Handgun ==

Is it just me or does the in game handgun look nothing like a CZ75 and more like a SIG 220 series pistol? Whenever I get a close look at it I see a SIG. Also, it looks like Sullivan carries some sort of USP in his holster, though he never uses it. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 16:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Talk:The Town

2010-09-27T18:22:17Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Question on Fergie's gun *SPOILERS* */

==Glocks==
-I think these maybe actually be Glock 21's. Especially in the finally robbery, they fire them until the slides lock, firing only 7-8 rounds.--[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 17:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
:Ummmm, okay, firstly, the Glock 21 has a 13 round mag capacity, secondly, the weapons people may have just loaded 7-8 rounds for some reason, or the shots of the actors firing the other 9-10 rounds may have been cut.--[[User:Pølaris|Pølaris]] 22:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

::Yeah, going by the number of rounds fired is never a good way to discern particular weapons' calibers in movies. Movies also routinely show actors firing hundreds of rounds from subguns and assault rifles loaded with 30-shot magazines, simply because the reloading is done between takes and not shown on camera. Same idea applies here - as Polaris pointed out, the editor may have simply cut footage of the rest of the magazine being emptied. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 22:34, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

==Unknowns==
[[Image:Town-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Jem (Jeremy Renner) fires a pistol.]]
:Looks like a USP. -[[User:The_Winchester|Dr. Awesome]]
:I agree, i think it's a USP Compact. -Scott; August 12th 2010
Am I the only one who thinks this movie looks like it will be awesome? --[[User:ManiacallyChallenged|ManiacallyChallenged]]
::Plus also this page is the talk of The Town. Puns are awesome.
And am I the only one who thinks that these guys are, like, alarmingly well-equipped for bank robbers? I WISH it were that easy to get a full-auto HK416. :(
:::Even if the registry was reopened you would still have a hard time getting one. HK would go out of their way to somehow stop that.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Keep in mind that this is MASSACHUSETTS that the movie is set in. Strictest gun laws ever. SKS rifles aren't even allowed to be purchased inside the Boston city limits. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 10:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

You know I have to admit I was thinking the same thing myself in regards to the weapons used by this crew and those in other movies like [[Heat]] or something. Where are these guys getting their firepower? HK's 416 is strictly in use by SOCOM or SWAT units. Sure the argument can be made they are acquiring some stuff on the "black market" but...come on!!! --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 20:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Heat actually made more sense than this one. AR-15 carbines are relatively easy to convert with drop in parts, Sigs and HK pistols are easy to find, and a semi-automatic HK 91 are nothing compared to an HK 416. [[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 00:56, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Well to stretch it, we can say this movie takes place during a time when the HK416's civilian variant has been released already and like in Heat, the character bought the civilian variant and put in a drop in auto conversion. It IS a stretch, but at least my theory explains how they at least got a hold of a 416.

Oh and to the guy up there saying that because this movie takes place in Massachusetts with the strictest gun laws ever doesn't mean ANYTHING to bank robbers or criminal in general. They coulda bought their guns outside of the state, transported them back to Massachusetts and then made them full auto. This is the fact showing that gun control in one state doesn't matter when all you have to do is go to the neighboring state. I mean, what's H&K really going to do when they find out that someone is using their guns in a bank robbery? You really think the gun company would go out of their way to make sure their name isn't tarnished when police have problem finding high profile criminals? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:25, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
:I should know what you can and can't do in MA, seeing as I live there. :P You can't even buy a handgun in Boston with a magazine that can hold more than ten rounds, any shotgun with a revolving cylinder and/or a capacity exceeding six rounds, a semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine capacity exceeding 10 rounds, any SKS, AK47, UZI, AR-15, Steyr AUG, FN-FAL, and FN-FNC rifle. I agree, your point is valid, but there's no need to sound all snippy about it. all I was saying is that obtaining that level of weaponry would be a fairly difficult task. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 21:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
::I wasn't trying to be "snippy". You're just reading my text in that tone. I was just being informative on how things work to the criminal mind. They don't follow the law or any rules at all. You really think a magazine limit will stop a criminal from committing crime? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 13:06, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
::Haha absolutely not, and in that respect, most, if not all, firearms laws are a joke. Sorry if I took that the wrong way, no hard feelings. :) -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 17:57, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
And just as another stretch, it IS possible to get the HK USC, with is the civilian UMP and customize it to function like a UMP, but the best theory on why all the hard to get weapons is they most likely stole them from the Police. I mean, there are many departments that uses the UMP and there are some out there that do have the HK416. It wouldn't be TOO hard to believe they ambushed a cop car and stole their weapons or broke into a police armory. They seem to be good at breaking in and disguising themselves. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:32, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
:They could also possibly had illegal weapon imports from foreign countries. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 03:01, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
::I doubt it'd be an illegal import in full automatic since you'd have to have legit military or Law Enforcement credentials for something like that. HK has a very poor track record when it comes to civilian customer service. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:06, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

:It appears that Hollywood uses HK416s as well.

::You guys are over-thinking this again. The bottom line is this: The robbers are using HK416s and other exotic automatic weapons because those guns look cool, and visual impact is all that matters in Hollywood. In real life, it is highly unlikely that we would ever see bank robbers using such hardware. It's not impossible, but it is highly unlikely. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 15:11, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Well said MT2008...this is a movie not a documentry.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 17:32, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

==Yahoo Movies==
Yahoo Movies has some pictures.
http://movies.yahoo.com/photos/movie-stills/gallery/2274/the-town-stills#photo6
http://movies.yahoo.com/photos/movie-stills/gallery/2274/the-town-stills#photo37

== Jimmy O? ==

Is it just me or is that cop with the wooden stocked 870 played by Titus Welliver, who plays Jimmy O'Phelan on Sons of Anarchy
[[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 00:50, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
:Yeah that's him. He was in Affleck's Gone Baby Gone also.--[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 01:34, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

==Rifle with dual-magazines==
Anyone knows what this rifle is? (in much better detail at [http://thetownmovie.warnerbros.com/data/downloads/wallpapers/get_wallpaper.html?image=1600/TT_WPs1600_NB_002.jpg]) - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 02:07, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
[[Image:TT-AK?dualmags.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]

AKMSU - [[User:Mythekal|Mythekal]]
:Thanks. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 02:52, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I always knew the nuns would get desperate after Sunday donations dried up :) [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 14:33, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
:Don't fear their rulers, few their automatic weapons [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:04, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

== Question on Fergie's gun *SPOILERS* ==

This is one for people who've seen the movie. Near the end when Doug goes to Fergie's and kills him. I was pretty sure that Fergie's pistol was a Glock but my friends swear that it was some sort of 1911. Did anybody get a clear look at it? [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 17:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
:Definitely a 1911 pistol, you could see the rounded top of the slide and the foreend was distinctly 1911 style.--[[User:Pølaris|Pølaris]] 01:36, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Damn, how they hell did I miss that? I'm supposed to be the 1911 whore and they're the ones who saw it haha, time for pride swallowing I suppose. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 18:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:The Town

2010-09-26T17:50:12Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Question on Fergie's gun *SPOILERS* */ new section

Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops

2010-09-21T22:37:57Z

ShootingLiberal: /* CZ75 */

This game has a cold war look to it

==Just a thought==
Don't wet your pants at me here, but the final mission might be in the future, which would explain the Anachrostic weapons in the game.. like how in COD: MW there was "all Ghillied up", a mission in the past--[[User:SargeOverkill]]

==AKS74U a RIFLE, not a SMG!!!!==

It seems like its cool to put the 74u as a subgun these days, WTF. Its a Short carbine.
:It's an SMG.
:: '''LoL.'''
::Traditionally, a carbine is defined as a shorter variant of a full sized rifle, which the AKS-74U clearly is. The definition is a bit looser today. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:54, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
:::The AKS-74U is a Carbine, meaning shortened assault rifle. The AK-74 is the main model. The "S" means its a Carbine. The "U" means it has a folding stock. --ZEER
:::: No :) "S" ( Sklopnyj - somehing like "foldable") means folding stock and "U" ( Ukrochenyj - Shortened ) means carbine :)

An SMG is a machine gun shooting pistol caliber rounds, which 5.45x39mm doesn't qualify as.

At least this time around they managed to get the name of the gun right. :/ [[Special:Contributions/124.148.203.141|124.148.203.141]] 07:41, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

A carbine is a short rifle, not a shortened assault rifle. I don't think the Mosin Nagant is a assault rifle or the M44 Carbine Mosin Nagant is a shortened assault rifle. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:38, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
:From tactical point of view AKS-74U can be classified as SMG because of its size, as well as Mk 18, 9A-91, SR3 etc. But from a technical view all those are of course ultra-short assault rifles.

Just to confuse everyone a bit more, Colt marketed the CAR-15 as a Sub-machine Gun. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 11:02, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

::The manufacturers are actively MARKETING these ultra short full auto 'carbines' to fulfill the submachine gun role in both military and law enforcement applications (both The M16 and the AKs have been sold this way). That's why people call them SMGs. The guns makers routinely muddy the waters as to the difference between the two definitions themselves. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 14:49, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

:::Guys, IMFDB has always classified the AKS-74U as an assault rifle (see my recent page for the movie ''[[Icarus]]'', for example). It may be used in the submachine gun role, but it is a derivative of the AK-74, which is unmistakably an assault rifle. So I am going to defer to tradition here; we have to be consistent.

:::Also, bear in mind that the original AK-47 (the weapon we all think of as the classic assault rifle) was once thought of as a submachine gun in many of the armed forces that carried it (including the People's Liberation Army of China). -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 23:53, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

::::Video Games are ruining young minds. assault rifles shoot rifle rounds, not pistol rounds. put down the Modern Warfare and Bad Company.

It's an Intermediate rifle, like the P90 or MP7A1, slightly smaller caliber but with an effective range between a rifle's range and a sub gun's range.
:No, that is an incorrect comparison. The AK-74U is just a compact rifle since it fires an assault rifle round, not an assault rifle "styled" rifle. The P90 and the MP7 are designed from the ground up to be PDWs that fired ammo that are necked down rifle rounds instead of pistol rounds designed with the same armor piercing power as the full size rifle. It's like the Colt Model 733 or the 933 or any of the other shorten assault rifle variants. A submachine gun is always compared to weapons that fire pistol caliber ammo. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:15, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

But weapons like the SAM-R use the same caliber as 933 and 733, 5.56x45, and the SAM-R is used as a DMR. i doubt the 5.45x39 could be a marksman rifle cartridge. even though its longer than the 5.7 or 4.6, its range and accuracy are not that of a true assault rifle.

==IGN reviews the Call of Duty: Black Ops trailer==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=292tCSCvFQY

I wish that IGN would actually hire people who know what the hell they're talking about, instead of a couple of conceited pricks who think that the M4 Carbine assault rifle existed thirty years before it was produced. Not to mention the fact that they also erroneously refer to it as "a machine gun" and the Steyr AUG assault rifle series as "submachine guns". [[Special:Contributions/203.59.108.117|203.59.108.117]] 11:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
::nerd rage
: You gotta cut people some slack when it comes to these kind of things, why would we expect the guys who analyze video game trailers to know any more about guns than what they see in video games? Although calling the AUG a sub-machine gun was pretty boneheaded...[[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 16:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
:Well even though the M4 Carbine wasn't around at the time. This game takes place during the Cold War, Vietnam, and the rest of the time period was not yet announced. You can't be sure when the game takes place until you see it, even though they announced an era, they didn't announce a time line. I'm sure you know that the M4 was made to replace the CAR-15, but the SOG got their hands on the newest weapons before they went into service. Which means, once the M4 was made, it would be sent straight to them. And besides, like he said, its just a game.

::I love how the only defense for the anachronistic weapons is "SOG got it before everyone else". That must mean that when US Army Rangers charged up onto Omaha Beach in 1944, they must have had M4A1s and M16A4s kitted out with EOTechs, Aimpoints, ACOGs, and PEQ-16 laser/light modules, right? Or when SEALs were hunting VC in the Mekong Delta, they must have had SCARs and M249s, right? Or how about the Battle of the Alamo, where Davy Crockett was picking off Mexican soldiers with an XM29 OICW, right? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

: Yes the excuse is a bit weak, but don't you think that analogy is a bit extreme? So far the differences have only been maybe 2 or 3 years, not 20 or 30 like in your analogy. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 14:41, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

We've been having this reoccuring conversation that the AR-15 in the game should not exist at all. There might have been conceptual designs for a flat top AR-15 carbine, but it isn't like SOG could hold up a picture of an M4 that hasnt been thought up yet and tell some gunsmith to make this with flip up iron sights, which also shouldnt exist. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:51, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Now I'm actually hearing rumors is that this is an alternate history themed game, so that would just debunk weapons that shouldn't exist if it is alternate history [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:54, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

: Oh I wasn't even thinking of the wierd AR-15 when I said that, I guess you're right. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 02:07, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

:So what if ''Call of Duty: Black Ops'' takes place in an alternate timeline? ''Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater'' and ''Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker'' feature alternate histories and yet they still managed to retain a sense of realism when it came to firearms. Treyarch needs to take a leaf out of Kojima Productions' book. Also, while we're at it, I wonder just how much they have paid these so called SOG veterans to keep their mouths shut about the inconsistencies of this game and instead talk about how their old buddies in the unit regularly included crossbows (equipped with explosive rounds, no less) in their field arsenal while completing missions. [[Special:Contributions/203.206.7.125|203.206.7.125]] 06:03, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

==zombie mode==

will they have it? It is treyarch, but i havent heard anything solid yet.
:The article that I read (and summarized below) seemed to indicate that they had something other than zombies. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully not copying spec ops.....

Maybe it's aliens.

Area 51 anyone? Eh? Eh? [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 22:17, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

==What's the type of grenade under the M18 smoke grenade on the breaching artwork?==

Is it just me, or there's some type of White Phosphorus grenade under M18 smoke grenade on the breaching artwork? The guy who wields the MAC-10 has it. http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/1458/uknowngrenade.jpg

Here is the original version: http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100522160405/callofduty/images/4/4b/100355837.jpg

==add m16 to page==

It was delted since there was no in game footage, but then there is a m16 slung to the main guy's back on the cover. i say add it. I know theres no in ge screenshot yet, but look, theres no in game shots of 1911s either.

Buddy, that stuff has been added already-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

m16 has been removed, only "ar-15 carbine" is there.

==='''M16 is in.'''===

I am not sure which version is that, but i added it as A1.
:I see no forward assist and a three-prong flash hider in the screenshots, so it looks to be an original M16. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 18:05, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

It have been confirmed in '''Call of Duty:Black ops INSIGHT''' trailer.

Oh crap, they mentioned Sonny Puzikas, I remember that name from the spetsnaz episode of Deadliest Warrior.

==Weapons that would make sense==
M72, M60, M14, Stoner 63, M40A1, M16A1, MAC-10, Remington 1100, Smith & Wesson M76, Browning Hi-Power, Hawk MM1, Smith & Wesson 39

AK-47, AK-74, Mosin-Nagant, PM Makarov, Steckin APS, SKS, Dragnnov, PKM

-Add any other weapons that would make sense
:M3A1 "Grease Gun"/Suppressed M3A1, Carl Gustav M/45/Suppressed M/45, suppressed Uzi, CAR-15 w/CGL or M203, Ithaca 37, Remington 870, Remington 7188 Automatic Shotgun, SOG modified RPD, M-60 "Death Machine"(M-60 w/ cut down barrel and ammo pack), HK-33(Harrington and Richardson T223).
:RPD, MAT-49/suppressed MAT-49--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 13:08, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Dirty Harry's Smith & Wesson Model 29 and Tony Montana's "Little Friend"
:What the hell do you have with those movie guns ? Why should they be in ?

It would be amazing to see Sa. Vz. 58 there. It was frequently used by vietcong fighters as USSR´s help.

::The M60D, the M1928 Thompson, the PPSh-41, the StG44, the Winchester 1200, the RPG-2, and the Sten. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 00:14, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

:::It would be good if they could do a proper tactical reload? If you reload a gun with a round in the chamber you will have an extra round which means you should have a 31 rounds on let's say an M16A2.

''''''Some good proofs''' :'''

http://nam64-75.hill.cz/download/file.php?id=691&sid=c3ccbd4348543db02c420df186cb428c ('' '''NVA training''''' )

http://www.quansuvn.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=41.0;attach=4972;image

http://nam64-75.hill.cz/download/file.php?id=1169 ('' '''SSG Patrick Tadina with his Vz. 58''''' )

http://www.psywarrior.com/rewardforguns.gif ( '''''Vietcong fighters firearms info poster, left side, third from down''''' )

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/1164/biethaisamopal9wq.jpg ( '''''Captured Vz. 58 on left''''' )

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff164/joshuadowdle/Dad.jpg ( '''''In hands of SSG Patrick Tadina''''' )

''SSG Patrick Tadina - Legendary, five-tour Vietnam ranger. He is in rangers´s hall of fame.''

==Should be==
There should be M72 LAWs, M60s and M14s. cause this is Vietnam baby!

Nah. They just arent cool enough for Treyarch. And if they will add those weapons - They will all have RIS rails, scopes, lasers, GL attachemnts, silencers.... --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 11:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)No need for your cheap sarcasm here. This game doesn't seems to pursue that Nam atmosphere with rocknroll, massive chopper assaults, jungle patrols and "smell of napalm in the morning"

I'm sure you will also be able to pick up laser weapons and crap like that. [[User:SargeOverkill]]

==E3==

Added E3 screens - .357 Python and AR15 .

== Not an AK-47 ==
Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that the mag isn't curved enough to be a 7.62x39 mag? It could be a -74 prototype, without the flash hider. Given the time frame, this may make sense.

Thanks for that, I also didn't note it before. It looks to be a WASR-2/3.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 16:19, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

:This game seems to have a lot of rendering issues when it comes to the guns [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:40, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
OMG it is damn videogame for god's sake, the guns aren't real and are nothing more than 3d drawings -of course they aren't going to be exactly like such and such gun. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 17:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

'''3D drawning''' ? Hell, that would be interesting. And GTFO, this is '''firearms site''' and ''YES'', we care about reality. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 17:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

:Thanks for pointing that out. We are a gun site and we pay attention to details. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Well guess what, THESE ARENT GUNS!!! They aren't effing real they are nothing more than 3d models that someone threw together in 3DS MAX or whatever the hell they use so of course its not going to be up to every detail, That's why I don't do VG pages anymore--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 19:47, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

::You appear to have missed the point of this website...

::Yea. The prop guns in movies aren't real, or air-soft guns. This website is for identifying fire arms, and if you didn't know that then you obviously missed the point of the website, like he said.

AsAstra, the point that I don't think you're understanding, is that even if they're merely three dimensional renderings of the guns, and not the guns themselves, we should try to be as correct as possible. If something says that it's an Ak-74, but actually looks more like a different gun, we should call it the different gun, so as not to confuse anyone new to the site. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 15:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

On the topic of the AK, knowing video game developers the AK being used by the Vietcong will most likely be the same one in those snow picks. I don't think we can call it a 47 right of the bat.[[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]

Fixed the WASR-2 messup. It's not a WASR-2. NO WASR series of rifles have the stamped steel MAGWELL DIMPLES. When looking at the screenshots the AK in game HAS those magwell dimples. That right there shows it's not a WASR.
Some people are still saying it could be WASR-2. It's not a WASR-2. WASR-2's are new production (within the past few years) rifles from Romania made ONLY for semi-automatic use and for importation into the US. There's no way on God's green earth that the rifle in game is a WASR-2.

More than likely this is just an AK-47 with an incorrectly modeled mag. They ARE modeling these things after airsoft guns ya know.

== Degtyarov ==
It just cant be DPM. Lok - It totally doesnt have ironsights - And MAG isnt on top. + Its very unlikely some guy will cary Spas12 and Degtyarev. I just think its some AK type - Or it may be some different gun, but it isnt Degtyarev.
You may keep it there, but it will be false information.

==ummmm==
This page really needs a cleanup or a deletion.
There is also too much informal talk on the page itself, infact all of it is. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 04:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

===Moved from main page--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 04:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)===
== AR-10 ==

Another unknown M16 family gun. But this one seems more like [[Armalite AR-10]] A4

[[Image:AR10-4.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Armalite AR-10 A4 7.62x51mm.]]
[[Image:AR10.JPG|thumb|none|400px|M16 Family unknown gun as appeared in Black Ops teaser.]]

:The magazine seems too long to be an AR-10
::Thats looking a bit like a STANAG Magazine. The STANAG Magazines are compatible with many NATO weapons, including the SCAR-L Carbine, the M4 Carbine and the M16 Rifle. Even if it were an AR-10 its likely that it would be chambered for the standard NATO round and accept the STANAG type magazine.

Also the AR10 is a civilian gun right? So why would special forces like that guy above be holding it? I personally think its an M16(either A1 or A2) with a scope attached to its carrying handle/iron sight.

:It's a strange AR-15 Carbine with a flat top [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

AR-10 is not necessarily civilian. It is entirely possible that SOF would use one.

I think is not AR10.AR10 use .308 or 7.62x51mm round and the magazine large and short than AR15.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

: Its uselles to keep AR-10 discussion here. We all know its that ankward AR-15 or XM177 or whatever.

== Un-identified guns ==

[[Image:MP5G3.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''1''' : Possibly [[MP5]] or [[G3]].]]
[[Image:UNKNOWNLOL.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''2''' : I totally dont know.But it may be some russian one.]]
It seems to look like a [[MAC-10]] or an [[Uzi]] with the stock extended-[[User:SargeOverkill]]
[[Image:UNKNOWN THE MOST.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''4''' : Its hard to tell which gun this one is, but it looks like [[Beretta AR-70/223]] or Daewoo K2. I think that this gun could be any gun I see and AK there but it could be a siper rifle for all we know]]
As to the first unknown gun, it's too short to be a G3, so I believe it's an MP5. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 01:50, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

== RPK ==

From the looks of it, it might be an RPK-74. Note the 45-round banana mag and the flash suppressor.

The "RPK" and the "Valmet" are the same guns - look carefully at the screenshot. Given that the 7.62mm AK-47 appears in game and the timeline, I'm gonna say that it's not an RPK-74, but a 7.62x39mm RPK or one made to look like a Valmet for some reason. Maybe Treyarch modelers are using 80's action movies as a reference for their RPK model. *shakes head*

No. Look on that "RPK" an you will see typical RPK stock. Look on "Valmet" and you will see it doesnt look like Valmet :)--[[User:Werc|Werc]] 03:53, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Look at the front of the Valmet trigger guard. Now look at that same exact place on the "Valmet" in the game picture. Different. There is no Valmet, it's an RPK.

Moved "Unknown LMG" stuff to the RPK-74 section. Whoever posted those images under there originally failed to notice the way the RPK-74 front sight is canted compared to the Valmet. --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 14:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

==M1911==

In the title screen there is a soldier holding a 1911 i believe it also says something on the side.

It says "Sally" on the slide.

The 1911 looks more like the first and not the A1, look at the ejection port.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Here's to hoping it's 1911s will be in the arsenal in multi-player, and not the tease in MW2 --[[Special:Contributions/67.181.114.114|67.181.114.114]] 07:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)JanG

== good decision ==

As well as Weapon customization there will also be a character customization feature.
- That game is gonna be just awesome. Character customization ? Damn, just in R6:V style (ha-ha)

* Custom characters? hell yeah --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 00:38, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
i agree with that customization policy, i liked how in R6V2 they did that, and i can only hope they bring back CoD4s M4A1 Grenadier back, and i also completely agree with the historic battle/ war thing as compared to a (***Spoiler) nuclear warfare and a domestic terrorist plot, i would much rather see Black Hawk Down pop up in a newer game as opposed to Vietnam, but i would settle for a Operation Acid Gambit type game also.

Customizable characters in a game where... you can't actually ''see'' the character? FAIL.
* Customizable characters in game where will be 3rd person mode, and where other players can see it ? Your post '''fail'''.
:When did Black Ops become third person? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

It isn't. He's saying that other characters will see your 3rd person form. Also, it's noteworthy that MW2 DID have third person mode.
:So then I've gotta agree. Character customization in a game where you can't actually see your guy seems like a fail to me, too. It's not like anybody in MP is really gonna stop shooting at you to say "hey, cool guy, what kind of vest is that?" And how do I activate this third person mode in MW2? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:50, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

:: Well, i dont know. But what about trying "3RD PERSON" in "Play" screen ?

I think it's hilarious how people are whinig about the customization... Go play R6. Custom characters work in FPS games.
:Yeah, i bought R6:V2 not so long ago and its amazing. I think that game has best character customization ever. Its only pity you cant do anything with your teammates.
:R6V also has a cover system where you can actually ''see'' the guy/girl you're playing as, a third person mode cheat, and player characters who actually have voices and speak rather than being mutes with no form of personality whatsoever, none of which Black Ops has. I simply think character customization is unnecessary. That's not whining, it's called ''having an opinion". [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

How does the post fail it was an update its not like i'm wrong. its not like i said there would be some sort of Grizzly Bear cannon. it was a NEWS UPDATE!!! THINK next time a stupid comment is thought by yourself.
Also heres the ANSWER the other players can see you just like AVP. so thats how customization comes in handy. [[user:moviemaster1993|moviemaster1993]]
:First off, I never said ''your post'' failed. That was ''your'' response to ''me'', smart ass. I was commenting on a feature of the game I think is unnecessary, something I'm fully allowed to do. You aren't the lord of opinions around here. Second, comparing Rainbow Six to Call of Duty is about as much of a failure as one can accomplish. Lastly, who the hell cares if another player can see you? I wouldn't be customizing my character for other people, just like other people aren't going to be customizing their characters for me. It's not like everybody's gonna stop shooting and comment on every other player's individual character, is it? The only stupid comments on here are coming from ''you''. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:30, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I think it's more for identification than anything. So if you're pissed at one guy, you can just look at him ans say "Hey it's that one guy, Imma kill 'em", instead of reading the little tiny red words above their head that is often jibberish anyway. Just my opinion, though. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 03:45, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

== MP5k ==

You think they're putting that in there to copy MW2?
:No I think they're doing it to fulfill their MP5 quota. MW2 wasn't the first game to feature the MP5K, broski.-protoAuthor 00:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about that. They also have an AUG in the game and a SPAS-12. Not a coincidence that MW2 also has these. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

- Heh. Spas and AUG were in tons of other games. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 05:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

But THIS game is directly part of the COD franchise. It's a bit repetitive to show guns that has been in previous games. Well ok WWII games don't count because they cant help having the same guns, but this is supposed to be Treyarch's turn at making a new game, but so far, none of the weapons are new. What about instead of the SPAS-12, we get an 870, or instead of the AUG, we get...any other bullpup rifle of the time. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm thinkin' maybe they showed off the MW2 guns first to get MW2 fans interested in this game. Then maybe later they'll show off some new guns. Here's to hopin'. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 22:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I derinitely think they're putting the MP5k in to copy MW2. They could have put in any other variant of the MP5, variants that weren't in prototype stage and would probably be more combat effective, but they went with the k variant. That said I don't think it's any coincidence the SPAS-12 and AUG is in there either.

You don't get the fans back with the same old guns. You draw interests with NEW guns that hasn't been used before. Variety and distinctions. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:19, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, Treyarch apparently didnt start copying first. MW2´s specops get idea fairly sure from WaW´s coop system :D
:The latest issue of the official xbox magazine says that they originally had planned on having co-op throughout the entire campaign in MW2, but cut it because it messed with the narrative. Or, it would've been way too fun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
the AUG was stupid in the game, no1 in USSOCOM uses that gun
* Would you mind telling what do you have against bullpup designs, beside "the looks"?--[[User:WhiteSlift|WhiteSlift]] 11:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
* Heh. MP5k get into service 20 years after Vietnam war. There was only prototype in latest parts pf Vietnam war. MAC10 or UZI would be much more realistic in hands of US soldiers. Atleast much more than prototype gun. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 06:49, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
*"MP5K get into service 20 years after Vietnam war"...the MP5K isn't that new. Considering that the war ended in 1975, and the MP5K was introduced in 1976, you are way off.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 01:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

true why would they be carrying a Prototype in to combat

Well how much differently could essentially just a shortened MP5 with a foregrip work from the regular MP5?

Because it's a video game that doesn't care about accuracy and realism. I mean what loser actually waits until Picatinny rails to be invented? Go ahead and put them on your rifle in Nam, it's the new trend.

Why are you complaining about the AUG in particular, I mean USSOCOM doesn't use it? Yeah, well they sure as hell don't use the deagle or the AA12 or the FAMAS but I don't see you complaining

"I mean what loser actually waits until Picatinny rails to be invented?" Picatinny rails have been around since 1913, broski.
:Not in their modern version, Broseph Stalin.

You all are forgetting..this is SOG, not SOCOM. SOG could carry into battle whatever they wanted to. Could they have carried a prototype MP5K? Sure! Keep in mind..they had access to stuff that NOBODY ELSE in the military had access to at that time. Hell..one time they brought an airhorn with them and scared the crap out of an entire NVA division with it.
:Look, I can understand having access to weapons no one has ever heard of at the time, but you can't have access to weapons if it doesnt EXIST in the world yet. I mean just because they are SOG doesn't mean they have their own special gunsmith to factory make new parts and designs for weapons that haven't been thought up yet. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:21, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

== What the hell is up with this AR-15 Carbine? ==

It looks like a 733, but at the same time, not since it also has a flat top, but the scenes in the trailer that showed this rifle is assumed to be Vietnam era, so a flat top AR-15 shouldn't exist at the time much less a rail system for it. Also the same AR also has a rear iron sight on the flat top. This doesn't make sense [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

- I think its XM177, but customized way to much. Its mucb more possible that Treyarch just failed. I think they just added rail system/flat top just because MP. You know, attachments. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 05:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

::It cannot be an XM177 if it has a flattop receiver. Those did not exist when the XM177s were introduced. The flash hider is also Vortex, not the XM177-type. The game's 3D artists might have been ignorant about what AR carbines existed at the time. But that is not an XM177. Not by a long shot. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I think the game's 3D rendering tech was mostly like stone because it's the 60s and 70s, but the trailer animation is horrible! I could barely tell what was going on and the weapon details are no where like MW2. Say what you want about MW2 when it comes to consistencies, but at least they can render their weapons correctly. My first upload of that funky AR-15 shows the handguard as this polygon like thing. And did flat top receivers exist during Nam? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

:::''And did flat top receivers exist during Nam?''

:::No, not at all. My recollection is that the Colt ACR (introduced in the 1980s) was the first AR-type rifle to feature a flattop receiver. Even though the ACR was a bust, flattops were subsequently carried over into future AR generations. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

With these seemingly anachronistic flat top recievers and flip up sights I think this game is headed towards failure. Seems like they're taking the MW2 route and making their "balanced" and cosmetically changed multiplayer weapons also appear in single player. I hope by some miracle they don't or else they don't get my money.

:And here I remember talking to my brother about how they can fuck up the M16 by either putting A2s or burst A1s, but this is WAY over there in the incorrect area. Haven't they seen any Nam movies? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

: Excalibur01 - or use five minutes just f-i-v-e f**king minutes of their time and try to google some Vietnam-era photos. Or they could hire someone with at least basic knowledge of era background and weaponery. You know, they spent money on countless other things. But I guess that Call of Duty is now like B-rated action movies. Make as many as you can and don't worry about the quality. Nobody gives a s*it about how it looks like or if it is correct as far as it would look cool and geek teen age kiddos would pay the money so they could play multiplayer on their lagging net servers. [Ragnar - 22:25, 19 May 2010]

Hopefully they at least have the M16 have full auto instead of burst, would make it more fun that way. I did read that this isn't taking place in vietnam on yahoo news which probably is incorrect but this is ridulous of the weapons they are putting in.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 22:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

:I read an IGN article that it'll take place throughout the Cold War, from the end of Nam to Cuba and also Princess Gates London [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:17, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I researched the history of picatinny rails, turns out Treyarch may have actually done very good research. This is what I found: "The MIL-STD-1913 standard was developed out of efforts during the M16A1 Product Improvement Program which eventually resulted in the M16A2. One of the abandoned ideas was a receiver with a built-in rail. In the 1970s, Rock Island Arsenal experimented with a sniper AR-10 with a Weaver rail. In Vietnam, the Model 656 had a built-in rail." Source:http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-18737.html
I don't know about you guys, but I'm now willing to believe the rails on this AR (Model 656?) isn't a goof at all.
:Well, its always good to know new thing :) But i think it still wasnt regular Vietnam equipment. And i also think there wont be even M16 or M16A1 ingame.--[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
::True, it wasn't regular Vietnam equipment. But these aren't regular soldiers either. These guys are top secret black ops, higher than tier one operators. They can use any weapon in the world, even ones that are in secret development. And you're probably right, I doubt there'll be an M16, simply because these experimental ARs look cooler, have a bit of mystery around them, and can accept multiple attachments. But I wouldn't be surprised if they name the rifles M16.

The model 656 looked like this:

[[Image:model 656.jpg]]

It was just an early M16 with an early style rail system. So far, I have not found images of a Carbine with these types of rails, experimental or not. Rails were not on the forefront of military minds before the 90s. The military didn't even decided to put rails on the M16 until a decade after the M4 came out. And even the Model 656 rails were not on a flat top receiver like the ones on an M4. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 13:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
:Aw crap, there goes my theory. Looks like it's back to just being a Treyarch fail.

I'm not one to justify inaccuracy in videogames but, the upper receiver on the 656 could easily be swapped with that of an AR-15 carbine. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 00:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure...but the one we see in the game is not the same rail receiver as the one the 656 has. It has a flat top like an M4 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed that the front sight isn't removed when an optic attachment is present, an improvement over other COD games. Maybe Treyarch realized an AR would be bolt-action if the gas block was removed.
:Low-profile gas block is not visible from first-person perspective. And 3-d person gun models were made as low-poly as possible to minimise system loads(this was crucial because games was intended for Xbox in first place)

Who know CAR-15 with rear flip up sight use in vietnam war? I see a south vietnam flag in picture.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]
: No. Though, prototype flat-top receiver and flip-up like on your screen could be possible, but it just doesn't look authentic to the time period. I wouldn't mind if they put in something like Model 656(pictured above). But they really need to get rid of that modern-looking AR.
[[Image:CODBOAR-15b.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]]

It's just like the Aperature sight in W@W, but no where near as bad. I don't see why people are making such a big deal out of it, sure it's not exactly authentic, but it's far from game ruining like what a lot of people here are saying.

== Complaints ==
Hey, it's a game, not a history lesson. It's all about fun and style and so. I do like a realistic movie or game, but I don't hate a game just because the artists created something they think it's better this way. Nobody complains when a director sums up a car ride that would take 1 hour in real life in one scene in the movie, or when he puts the light where the sun can never be just to make it look good, but when someone puts a cool looking AUG in a game set before 1977, because it looks cool, or creates his own creative vision of an AR-15 everyone freaks out. All the time you hear people say "They should have done better research!" or "They don't know anything about history!", but maybe the did research, and they know history, and they discussed it and decided that they want to create something own, because they feel it fits better in their creative work than what real life history can give them.

*Yeah, you are right. Now we need M1 Abrahams tank in some Napoleonic Wars strategy. Cause that tank is just cool - right ? Or maybe M4 Carbine in WW2 shooter ?--[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:28, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

::Treyarch is legally obligated to keep the timeline from going beyond Vietnam. [http://gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2010/03/04/the-activision-lawsuit-what-it-means-and-where-it-s-going.aspx] If that means they have to cheat a bit regarding the weapons, I'm willing to give them some leeway. Let's face it, we're probably the only people who truly care anyway. None of these inaccuracies are going to keep any of us from buying this game when it comes out and playing the heck out of it. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

They're not legally obligated to keep it from going beyond Vietnam. As that article says..all they need is full approval from West and Zampella. Considering those two aren't rampant assholes..it's a total possibility.
:That's a bit like saying other people can write Harry Potter novels as long as JK Rowling is okay with it, or other studios can make Star Wars movies as long as George Lucas is okay with it. Have you looked at the games IW has made? Have you noticed a pattern? (For those who don't want to look, all they make are CoD games. That is literally all they have going for them.) Sure, they COULD give away their golden goose and let someone develop else something Activision has given them exclusivity with, but I can't imagine a single scenario where they would. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 10:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

* Well, msot of CoD players wont even recognize M16 and M4 or HK416. So yep - We are maybe only ones who care about it :/ --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
::And mind you, Treyarch is the same developer that had Japanese troops using suppressed MP40s with reflex sights in WaW. Oh, and a RAY GUN TO SHOOT ZOMBIES. That being said, I was devastated when I found out that MW2 wouldn't have zombies, and I'll be even more devastated if BO doesn't have them. IMHO, zombies was the best part of WaW. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 17:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
* And IW had OMOH with FN2000´s and IMI Tavor´s - So whats the difference :D Hope zombies will be includeProxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0

too.

:Ok the Zombie thing in WaW was a side game. It's not part of the "story". If the zombies and the ray gun appeared in the actual missions, then we'd called bullshit but with a smile cause zombies are awesome to fight. The suppressors and red dot sights were for multiplayer to compete with COD4 at the time, so those don't count. We're talking historically accurate, period piece weapons. It's like we do a game taking place during the Civil War but we all got 1911s as handguns and M1 Garands as rifles. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
::You're telling me you wouldn't play a Civil War game where you can use an M1 Garand? ;)True, they tried that with Darkest of Days, but it was terribly done. And second, you CAN get the ray gun for one of the campaign missions, and it is awesome. (You can take down a tank with two shots.) But I know what you're getting at. I'm just saying we shouldn't let the nitty gritty get in the way of good gameplay, especially since Treyarch already has one hand legally tied behind their backs. Would they want to make a Modern Warfare-like game set in present day or the near future? Sure, but they can't, they're legally handcuffed to inflexible historical fact. Besides, no game has ever gotten its weapons exactly right. We have an entire generation of kids who believe an M1 Garand can't be reloaded without firing the entire clip, or it has less stopping power than a K98K. I won't lose any sleep if BO has AR-15s with flat top receivers, but I will if the game sucks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 06:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
You know if there gonna screw this game why don't the just add a bunch of laser guns or crap. I mean i could understand if the weapons in the game where off, but i have a feeling this game is going to be a cluster F***
::We're basing a lot on two trailers and some scanned images from a magazine 5.5 months from release. I'm going to reserve judgment until I actually play it or at least hear from people who have actually played it. Treyarch has little to lose here. If it's great, people will praise them, if it's not, people already think they're the Fredo Corleone to IW's Michael Corleone in the Activision family. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
:::And while we're here, we've been talking about how the angle of the AK mag is slightly off, but is anyone else annoyed that if you do a tactical reload and drop half a mag, those rounds in the discarded mag magically go back into your ammo stockpile and you don't lose them? This has been true in 99.7% of all FPS's I've ever played. Gamers have accepted the idea of the consequence-free tactical reload for over a decade now. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::::You're right it's a crying shame. Not only because it's more accurate when the game keeps track of ammo in specific mags but it also adds another challenge and element of strategy. I also enjoy the one game I've played that keeps track of the +1 round in your gun when you reload. I wish more games were like that. Sad thing is I don't see COD heading in the right direction ever again.
:::::The one time I saw them do the tactical reload correctly was... Navy SEALs Quake, a mod for Quake II. Yes, it was a mod made by amateurs over ten years ago. The big game companies aren't doing it right because they don't want to. I remember the first time I played a game that had different animations for reloading with a round in the chamber and one without. Operation Winback on the N64, also ten years ago. It was a nice touch. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::::::'''Operation Flashpoint''', '''Rainbow Six: Raven Shield''' and '''Insurgency''' all did tactical reloads properly (ammunition is a number of magazines, not bullets, and if you reload a partially-empty mag it goes back in the pool), and the latter two also simulated +1 capacity. Insurgency is a mod but the other two are retail games. --[[User:MattyDienhoff|MattyDienhoff]] 20:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

* But we arent complaining here about animation and bullet system, damn. We are critising look of those guns ! That stramge XM177/AR15 hybrid was seen many times in reveal trailer, so we can judge it. And it failed. Its still better when you have realistic gun without realistic ammo system than crazy-unrealistic looking gun with realistic ammo system. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::I don't think it'd be that hard to replace the skin. [[Black]] didn't give a damn about realism, but it was still enjoyable as hell. The way I see it, ultimately, it's just a game, to be played because it's fun, not as an interactive history lesson. If you want accuracy, watch the Military Channel or actually go out to the range. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::: Well, it doesnt have to be "interactive history lesson" but atleast a bit of realism would be nice. '''''BTW''': I visit shooting range once or twice in month :)''

As pointed out, we don't want TOTAL realism. Otherwise, one bullet hit to the chest is enough to kill you. At least head shots are instant kills in the game. But we're doing a game based on a particular period and it has to be accurate. I mean, if you were watching a WWI movie and see soldiers with M16s. That's a bit jarring right? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
:: Now he will answer it isnt jarring. If the movie has cool effects and famous actors.
:::Jarring, maybe, but I don't know if it'd ruin it for me. (Is it a sci-fi film? Surrealism? A film by Uwe Boll?) It'd be one thing to have blatant mistakes, like M16s in WWI, but would it have ruined [[Saving Private Ryan]] if Sgt Horvath had a post war M1 Carbine with a bayonet lug and adjustable rear sights instead? Did the fact that the officers had Webley Mark VI's instead of Adams Mark III's ruin [[Zulu]]? Did the fake M72 LAW in [[Ronin]] take you out of the movie? If it didn't, it's because you chalked it up as a goof, moved on, and enjoyed the rest of an otherwise good movie. If it did, then I don't know what to tell you. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:52, 25 May 2010
(UTC)

Here's a hypothetical question: This game is called Black Ops, so theoretically, they can make up whatever they want, what do we know, it's a black op, and thus classified. What if all the weapons in the game were all fake, either outright, or fictional modifications of real weapons? Would we still be up in arms? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:14, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
: I hate to say it but you might be onto something. I've heard rumors that Black Ops will rewrite history and take place in an alternate past. This is probably how Treyarch can get around the legal restrictions of not being able to make post-Vietnam games and explain these BS weapons. Personally I think it's pretty weak but it explains it.
:: Well, if it does... Wait-It doesnt! I read some article with one of Treyarch members which strictly denied possibility of alternate reality. Ill repat it again : its just some Treyarch modeller fail. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
It's not rewriting history at all basically it's saying that during the Cold War what if there were some Black Ops that went down to keep the whole thing from escalating into an actual official war. Which is completely possible.
:::It doesn't have to be alternate history, just a secret history. It's implied that the JFK assassination will be in the game. Is the player the second gunman on the grassy knoll? Is he supposed to stop the second gunman on the grassy knoll? Does he successfully stop a possible third gunman? They can make up anything they want in that scenario. A mission can have the player equipped with a prototype laser rifle, but it's scripted so the rifle is damaged or lost along the way, and the technology is lost forever. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:53, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

It would be great if they do include Dirty Harry's gun and Tony Montana's "Little Friend".

The Steyr AUG (Armee Universal Gewehr - Universal Army Rifle) had been in development since the late 1960s, as a replacement for venerable but obsolete Stg.58 (FN FAL) battle rifles for Austrian army. It was developed by the Austrian Steyr-Daimler-Puch company (now the Steyr-Mannlicher AG & Co KG) in close conjunction with Austrian Army.See? It's not that wrong. Got it from http://world.guns.ru/assault/as20-e.htm
:It's still wrong. Just because the AUG was in development doesn't mean a working prototype existed. And if it's supposed to be the prototype, why does the AUG in the game look like the production version, only without the grip, and not as depicted in the prototype drawing shown on the World Guns page? I think the whole prototype explanation is a lame excuse in order to include more modern weapons in the game. I would much rather see the weapons that SOG actually used included in Black Ops, instead of an assault rifle that we've seen about 5 billion times in other shooters. I already posted below how Treyarch could have used the Remington 7188 full auto shotgun in the game. This weapon was actually used in Vietnam, and as far as i know has never been used in a video game, but instead they chose the SPAS-12, which didn't exist at the time and has been used in dozens of other shooters.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 22:50, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

== Unknown ==
The rocket launcher under unknown is an M202 FLASH rocket launcher. Ashdude01 20:20 19 May 2010

Yes there is i added it to the guns page but some moron removed it

moviemaster1993 11:58 may 2010

== Carcano M91/38? ==

The images provided doesn't shot much and it is said that it can't be a mosin Nagant because the barrel is too short. Well it could be the carbine length variant or any other short barrel bolt action rifle. I can't see anything in the picture. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:26, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

It seems like its picture of that gun. Remember that game has to do something with JFK asassination and there can be barelly seen "Lee Harvey Oswald" on paper under that gun. So i think it have to be that gun - As some reference. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 03:48, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Ever heard of the Mosin Nagant M44 carbine or the finnish retooled M38?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 11:56, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

== M16 and XM177 ==

[[Image:Colts.JPG|thumb|none|500px|]]

Looks like the guy here has either an M16 as you can tell by the barrel pointing to the left and the barrel on the right looks like an XM177 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:26, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a M16A1 to me..which makes sense..since the A2 didn't come around until the early to mid 80's.

== Embargo lifts tomarrow, the 28th ==

Ones the embargo lifts we will be flooded with info, especially about guns

What embargo? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:45, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

There was an embargo for some journalist who previewed the game(they also could have played it too)and tomarrow it ends and info will get flooded all over the web

* It ended and only few informations and no new guns appeared. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 07:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

== Valment m78 ==
:The M78 does have its own page here, separate from the RPK. But yeah, I don't think the designers are gun-savvy enough to have both of these guns in this game.--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 19:55, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

What the year of Valmet M78 build? I think is not use in vietnam war the NVA don't have a finnish weapons during the war.And i think in the picture the gun is not Valmet M78.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

: And Spas-12 was in vietnam ? It may not be Valmet, but it fairly sure isnt RPK. Or another Treyarch modeller fail ? --[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 11:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Anyone notice that the picture of the unknown AK-type LMG has a front sight that upright on the front side and canted forward on the back side like the RPK-74's front sight? --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 17:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:The Valmet M78 was invented after the production of the M76 in 1976, which is another weapon considered anachronistic for the Vietnam War era if there's any in the game. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 01:45, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

== Time travel (well that would explain it) ==

[http://pc.ign.com/articles/109/1093572p1.html Another preview]
--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

The page doesn't exist [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
* Fixed that link. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Launching an SR-71 from an aircraft carrier? Is that even possible? O_o [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
:They were able to operate a U-2 from a carrier, but that wouldn't be nearly as sexy as flying an SR-71, now would it? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:32, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it is, You know how these game designers do ALL of their research. (Man I'm sarcastic tonight)--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
::It's pretty obvious that since MW2, the main source of research is action movies and Futureweapons reruns.

Damn straight.

[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]

Not that I have anything against the SPAS-12, AUG, or AK47s, but we need to see different types of weapons. What about an 870, or the AK-74? What about other types of Bullpup? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

: You think 12-year old child knows difference between AK-74, AK-47 and AKs-74u ? That wont make sence..... Why making more weapons when you can add only those "cool" and overused ones ? --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 15:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

My 11 year old brother can, just saying-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

== Prototypes ==

Just to let you know: German games magazine ''PC Games'' had an interview with the developers. In the latest issue, they write, that the black special ops team can get any equipment they want, including non-standard weapons, brand new prototypes and even customized and special built single pieces, <quote>which no one outside the team will ever get to see</quote>. So that is the official in-game explanation for every crude weapon you can see in the hands of the player.
:That's what I figured their reasoning would be. It makes sense but it's still a pretty weak explanation if you ask me.
:So super elite 1337 black ops delta teams can even get weapons ''that don't yet exist''? WTF? Why didn't our SF and SEALs in 'Nam have M4A1s with KAC rail systems, lasers, ACOGs, EOTechs, and bullets that can home in on enemy soldiers from 50 miles away, then??? It's a conspiracy to disarm the public, I tell you! But in all seriousness, I think it's an explanation that doesn't hold water. That mentality might work in 2016 during MW2, but not in a past setting like Vietnam where small arms development has been chronicled and we know where and to what it led. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
::I think it does hold water. Of course these finalized weapons weren't around in the late '60s to mid '70s. But how do you know their prototypes weren't? Most of the weapons in-game will either be early prototypes or in the case of the AR custom-built weapons made by the SOG operatives.
::Ok, they could at least make it look like prototypes, not like modern weapons.
::Okay, then how about when the next WWII game comes out, they give all the troops M16s, M60s, Mark 48s, G36s, AKMs, XM29s, and XM8s because, you know, super secret black ops teams can get any piece of kit they want, even if it doesn't exist yet. All they have to do is jump in Doc Brown's time machine, travel through time and grab the latest kit, then head back. 1.21 gigawatts! [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:::I've said it once before, if it's done well, I will absolutely play it. Most people play game as a means of escape, so would it really make a difference if I shot a Nazi with an M16 or an M1 Garand? He's not REALLY dead. He's not even real, and we've contributed nothing to the winning of WWII, or any war. In fact, we've contributed nothing but to our own satisfaction. They're called video GAMES. Playing games is about having fun. I'm sure many if us here loved Nazi Zombies from WaW. Why? Because we love shooting Nazis, and we love shooting zombies, and Treyarch did us a favor by combining the two activities. And we love it even more if we can shoot them with a ray gun that comes out of a magic box. Was it historically accurate? No, but believe me, the history major in me learned to live with it. (Hell, now you've got me all worked up, because as I'm typing this, I can't wait to get the chance to catch Hitler and bin Laden in a meeting and spray the room with a minigun.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok i get your point, it's a video game, and fun or not it should have realism, i mean c'mon!-[[User:sargeOverkill]]
::::BTW, they already sort of did that with the Time Splitters series. And those games were awesome. (At least 2 and Future Perfect were. I never played 1.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:30, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::I quite frequently have lots and lots and lots and lots of fun playing games, especially shooters, that adhere to reality. The reason I play a Vietnam or WWII shooter is because I want to immerse myself in the environment. That includes having weapons accurate to the period. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::I guess that depends if you consider these games historical or not. I just lump it in with Halo and GoW now, as CoD flew off the historical rails about two or three games ago, straight into "anything goes" territory, which was good from a story telling perspective. Even when it tried to be historical (up to CoD 2) you were still one or two men who personally killed half the German army. That's why I thought releasing WaW on Veterans Day was a backhanded tribute, because nothing honors veterans like a game that allows you to win WWII singlehandedly. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 14:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

==M14==

What with this being a Vietnam War game, I'm gonna be pretty pissed if you can't use a normal M14 rifle, without all the rails and crap.
[[Image:M14Rifle.jpg|thumb|none|500px|I want to use an M14 like this in-game]]

Well, it doesnt look cool enough. Expect it with scope, silencer, thousands of rails and plastic stock. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 18:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

1. They'll Probably put it in.
2. the rails are the modern demands of a soldier including the ability to easily mount optics and other accessories easily. theres nothing wrong with it.

:I'd like a regular wood stocked M14, and if you want optics, they did make a scope riser mount for M14s before rail systems. As for silencers, well that's easy, and heartbeat sensors shouldn't bother to return. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::If they want to be accurate with attachments, then they should have a sniper scope and a suppressor (suppressors were available at that time).

Randy Shughart a delta force sniper never had anything fancy on his. as stated in BlackHawk down he had a vietnam era M14, with a scope. nothing fancy there. besides in vietnam there really wasnt a need for anything fancy. silencer, hell the vietcong already knew they were there because of the helo. Lam- hadn't been invented. and a tac light is slightly useless seeing how they were in a jungle 95% of the time. [[Special:Contributions/71.194.219.9|71.194.219.9]] 01:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

: All of these attachments really ''WONT'' make sence. '''But its Treyarch'''.

== AUG sans grip ==

What the hell is up with the AUG without a foregrip? I don't mind the fact the AUG is anachronistic, but come on...why take off something central to firing the gun. Maybe the gun is semi-automatic in the game, because our character has to plunge his hand into a bucket of ice to stop the burning after each shot.
:Yeah, I don't understand that decision. The only possible explanation I can come up with is that they used the AUG with a grenade launcher as a model, like this one [http://www.steyr-aug.com/240.jpg], and then just deleted the grenade launcher. But this would mean that no one working on the project A) ever saw a movie with an AUG, including [[Die Hard]], which I would think every male between the ages of 21-49 in the english speaking world has seen, or B) could put two and two together and figure out that putting your hand directly on a barrel is not practical. That, or the plot involves that character severely burning his hand. If not, it's an utterly indefensible and boneheaded decision by the Treyarch staff. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 22:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
::And to be absolutely fair, the character is wearing heavy gloves while holding the barrel. But it still doesn't make sense. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

::What doesn't make sense to me is that they have a military advisor on staff. How come, at no point in the development, did this man point out that holding a gun barrel while firing is a bad idea, and has he not seen an AUG before? - Opening Poster.

::Doesn't the grip fold up?-protoAuthor
:::Yes, but you'd still be able to see it. [http://www.murdoconline.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/NEW-STEYR-AUG-right.jpg]--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:I wrote that without seeing the image. Sorry.-protoAuthor
::::I agree with the grenade launcher theory, especially since multiplayer was done first. Who knows, they might actually change the standard AUG model before the game actually comes out.

The AUG without vertical grip.I think a gun barrel is very hot.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

In third person it's just a character model fail. In first person you grip I guess what you could call the "finger guard."

I've seen pics of the Austrian Army holding their AUGs by the trigger guard like a P90 but not the barrel itself, that's stupid. Plus, who the hell in 1968 would even take a design like the AUG seriously. The M16 was just starting to be taken seriously by military brass around 1968.

......Why the hell wouldn't they take it seriously? You do know that the British had actually adopted a bullpup design in 1951 for a very short time. Search Em-2 Rifle. It even had a built in optical sight on the
carrying handle. We Yanks then bossed everybody into adopting the 7.62 and the EM-2 was abandoned because it was in the .280 round so they went with the FAL which could be much more easily changed to use the 7.62
Actually, the EM-2 would be a better choice for this game or the SA80 prototype that appeared in The Professionals. I am aware of the EM-2.
=== Bullpup guns ===

If they want bulpup gun in game why didnt they coice Em-2 ? Or Famas ? WHY THAT ANACHRONISTIC AUG, damn.
The FAMAS is even more anachronistic than the AUG. The FAMAS was adopted in the early eighties and it used a different type of 5.56 ammo than the NATO standard.

: Yeah. It get into service in eighties. But atleast there '''WERE''' first prototypes in 1968. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 06:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

ummm...the prototypes of both the FAMAS and AUG were developed in the seventies. A better choice might be the Stoner 63 which had a history of use by the Navy SEALs and other clandestine units

== OXM article ==

Official XBox Magazine did a feature on Black Ops (July 2010, issue 111,) and I figure I'd share some highlights:

- It was inspired by the book "SOG: The Secret Wars of America's Commandos," by Major John Plaster. [http://www.amazon.com/SOG-Secret-Americas-Commandos-Vietnam/dp/1581606761/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275440842&sr=8-1]

- The SPAS-12 you use during the Tet Offensive uses Dragon's Breath rounds.

- At least from their description, the "WMD" level sound suspiciously like the airfield level in MW2.

The whole game looks suspiciously like MW2, just my opinion though. Hughjefender

- The M202 FLASH is confirmed.

- The M1911s with "Sally" etched on them also have tally marks on them.

- They mention a co-op feature that "appears to be a successor" to zombies, which seems to me would indicate no zombies. Bummer.

- Multiplayer was ready before the campaign, so some of the campaign levels are based on the multiplayer maps.

- Regarding anachronistic guns, "'In this world, anything was possible' for these soldiers, [Treyarch head Mark] Lamia explains. All equipment requests were granted by their superiors. Cost, apparently, was no object."

- And finally, a quote from the military advisor, Lt. Col. Hank Keirsey (ret) (and something I've been trying to point out for a while now) "The Historical Advisor fights to get every last bit of accuracy, but always has to concede to the need for excitement." Keirsey appears to be the military advisor for the whole franchise, not just this game or for Treyarch.

--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

:Money is no object is one thing, but designing a different rifle system like you would design a James Bond car is a different thing. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

: So, basically they said those soldiers can have any gun. Come on, Treyarch ! Give them FN2000´s , Plasma Rifles and Gravity Guns !
No, really. Off course they can have special weapons. But only those which were designated before 1968. Not those which were designated 10 years after.--[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
::Yes, but since everything is secret, how do we know the CIA DIDN'T develop the AUG, or the SPAS-12, and cover it up by giving it to Steyr and Franchi, respectively? How can we be sure we DIDN'T capture any energy-based weapons from crashed UFOs? (Mind you, I don't work for Treyarch or owe them anything, but I have to give them credit for giving themselves such a clever out.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:::It seems like all these SOG's have custom-made pieces. And since Weaver rails did exist in Vietnam it would have been totally possible to make these weird AR's we keep seeing. Not saying I agree with this decision, but this is probably how Treyarch is getting away with it.

You guys are so wrong, My friend the NAVY SEAL told me something not to tell anyone else but I don't care. They are issued laser rifles just like the ones in Fallout 3 but have a disntegration setting meant for vaporizing. At least thats Treyarches logic. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:Calm down. I don't think any of us know when these weapons were in their first stages of prototypes and what they looked like in the prototype stage. Prototype weapons are definitely a recurring theme in Black Ops. Since these guys are above top-secret they can have experimental weapons that are also above top-secret. In the GKnova6 files, it specifically states the AUG in-game will be a prototype version. I wouldn't be surprised if the SPAS is also experimental and the weird AR is completely custom.
:::Cool

RC planes instead of predator missiles?

== Document from viral site ==

Over at the CoD wiki I found this "document" from an viral site connected to Black Ops: [http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100601175649/callofduty/images/3/3d/Doc10.jpg]. It describes the AUG as "very early prototype weapon; not in production". It also mentions the [[G11]]

and also the delicious China Lake Launcher
-Double Agent M

:It would be better if they included more of these prototype weapons. I would love to see weapons like BRG-15, H&K CAWS, Ster ACR, Colt SCAMP,etc. Even better would be a underwater level with the H&K P11! After all the inclusion of such weapons in the game will be better than the monotonous selection of Cold War-rea weapons like M1911,M21,G3,FN FAL,AK-74,etc.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 09:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

:I'll shit bricks of joy if the G11 is in there. I've wanted that gun in a Call of Duty game for as far as I remember. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

G11 eh?? im guessing its going to turn into the MP40 from WaW except in speed instead of power

== M202 FLASH ==
I made a couple of changes in this section including adding of screencaps. I rechanged it back to FLASH because everything is anachronic in this came and it can't be the more rarer XM191. Plus I added a M202 FLASH image, which is actually from Far Cry Instincts Predeator, since I could not find a single good picture of it in the web.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 15:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
:There's not anachronism, Treyarch keeps saying that all these weapons are prototypes. I'm not sure what people aren't getting about that. I'm pretty sure every weapon we've seen in American hands so far are a prototype of some sort. I think that the FLASH is the prototype version; why can't it be?
::The reference specifically said "M202." We're not going solely by the picture, but by what was actually written by someone who either played it or watched the game be played. And since I doubt the average game journalist is an ordnance expert, he only knew because it was probably labeled "M202" in the game itself. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 23:00, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You know just as well as I do video games often mislabel their guns either by mistake or just to give the public who don't know much about guns an idea of what that gun is instead of confusing them with specifics. I don't argue that it's going to be labeled M202, but I guarantee you Treyarch is intending it to be the prototype XM191.

:: XM191 was M202 prototype, just for your information. --[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
:::Yes, I'm aware of that. But given the shall we say, unique, circumstances of the game, wouldn't it make more sense to go with what the game says, rather than what's historically correct? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes XM191 is a M202 prototype.American send to test during late 1970s in vietnam.And i see a picture of XM191 in vietnam war museum. info from http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl50-e.htm [[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]
Here is what it shoots

[[IMAGE:Treyasuckers.png]]

Wow look like a RPG7 rocket.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

==Not being able to go past vietnam?==

What is this crap I hear about treyarch LEGALLy not being able to go past vietnam in game? A comapny can do whatever the hell they want.

[[User:k9870]]

:I know, I was about to make this same post.-protoAuthor 20:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
::From the article posted above (emphasis mine)
::"-Activision eventually convinced West and Zampella to stay with them by offering up a Memorandum of Understanding. In addition to extending their contracts through to October 2011, this legally-binding document gave West and Zampella some major financial bonuses as well as a couple other hefty promises. Chiefly, it gave the two "creative authority over the development of any games under the Modern Warfare brand (or any Call of Duty game set in the post-Vietnam era, the near future, or the distant future) including complete control over the Infinity Ward studio." '''In other words, Activision could not publish a Modern Warfare-branded game (or a Call of Duty game set any time later than Vietnam) without West and Zampella's full approval."'''
::West and Zampella were the two heads at IW who were fired in April. Now that they're no longer with the company, this might open the door for Treyarch's next CoD game to be Modern Warfare-esque, but there's a lot of litigation right now. The firing was way too late to affect BO, so they operated under the restrictions above. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I am still waiting for a WWI CoD with single- and multiplayer featuring France, the UK, the German Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, Russia, Japan, Italy and the USA. Unfortunately this would be too expensive and only few people would buy it. Thus such a CoD will never be made. Sorry for half offtopic. --[[Special:Contributions/84.181.247.180|84.181.247.180]] 20:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Paul_Baeumer
:I would love to play a CoD WWI game. (CoD: Great War? CoD: Over the Top?) I'd like to see them change it so you can change out your melee weapon, so instead of a knife, you can equip yourself with an e-tool, brass knuckles, or a spiked club. (Sorry to continue the off-topic.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 21:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
::And to stay on topic, how would they define "distant future?" Why not a CoD game set in 2110? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 21:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

== Why did someone add possible weapons? ==

Someone added possible weapon prototypes like the G11 and the Pump 40mm? I am removing them tomarrow if no one says anything about why they should be left on. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 02:22, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

: This document (http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100601175649/callofduty/images/3/3d/Doc10.jpg) from the Black Ops viral site could be the reason --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 03:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

:There aren't possible anymore, it has been '''confirmed''' that they will be in the game, with other sites like Call of Duty wikia including them in their weapons list.

[[Image:DOC10.jpg]] 
--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 04:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

:Yeah, and the Call of Duty wiki is a beacon of truth... [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

The AUG and M202 have see in game trailer.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

== Still a little chance ==

Well, they are gonna include dedicated servers. So they apparently release modtools - So it seems like its gonna be possible change guns models, just like in CoD4. --[[Special:Contributions/88.208.103.46|88.208.103.46]] 09:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

== M16 on magazine cover ==
It should be removed for now, seeing as there's currently no evidence to support its inclusion in the game. IMFDB chronicles weapons appearing in movies, television, and video games, not on magazine covers. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:12, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Game mags are a great source of weapons, thats where half the screenshots we see come from, game informer and the such.
:Screenshots are one thing, but there's no evidence that the image is actually from the game, it might just be an illustration the magazine drew up. I would heap the image of the guy sitting cross-legged with the two .45s in there as well. It wouldn't be the first time that weapons on cover art don't actually appear in the game itself. ([[Medal of Honor: European Assault]] comes to mind.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
:Is it bothering you that much?
::Well, considering the site has rules against printed media, yes it does bug me. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
:90% possibility that's a box-art. Don't be nerdy.

The game sure went into a lot of detail on the 1911 not to use it, and besides, what else would they have, they cant screw up history enough to throw in deegs and berettas.......oh wait, never mind, they can....

vietcong with a spas 12, damn at this rate my dream of marching into the reichstag waist firing an aa12 may come true
:That could be multiplayer screens

== SPAS 12 Folded Stock ==

All i can say is: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!!!
--[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 15:17, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Its more tacticaler and badassish to keep it folded, only noobs use a stock, not hardcore 1337 operators! (video game maker logic))
[[User:k9870]]

At least thay didn't put a goddamn XM8 in the game, if they do, i'll throw my goddamn PC outta the window, 'nuff said --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 03:04, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:'''nerd'''

At least the developers weren't stupid enough to put a rifle concept weapon into a game that takes place during the cold war. At least we can forgive them with the inaccurate AR-15s. And has any game developer ever fired a shotgun without a stock? It's a pain and you can slap yourself in the face if you don't brace yourself. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:I can only think of two possibilities, 1) you're firing Dragon's Breath rounds with the SPAS-12, and using it as small flamethrower, so you can get away with firing it from the hip, and 2)more importantly, WHEN HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A SPAS-12 FIRED FROM THE SHOULDER WITH THE STOCK EXTENDED? The only time I ever saw it was briefly in [[Jurassic Park]]. Even that famous scene in [[Miami Vice - Season 1#Franchi SPAS-12|Miami Vice]], a show that did guns pretty well, with [[Jim Zubiena]], a professional shooter would presumably knows guns pretty well, had him firing a SPAS-12 from the hip. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q2Il86-38A] Do you think most people even realize that thing on top is a folding stock? Yes, you, me, and everyone who's ever fired a shotgun ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgptDs_Nncw| and now this guy]) knows it's stupid to fire a shotgun without the stock extended. But I don't think the general public knows. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:It's not stupid. You don't really have to aim at point-blank range. I'm curious how aiming down the sights of SPAS with folded stock will work.

I'd love to know the reasoning behind including the SPAS-12 in this game. It didn't exist at the time, and I don't buy the "it's supposed to be a prototype" line. If it's a prototype, why does it look exactly like the production model?(I could make the same argument about the AUG)
Most likely this is Treyarch just being lazy, or including a weapon simply because it has been popular in video games, or both. They could have included an automatic shotgun that really was used in Vietnam, the Remington 7188. It was basically a Remington 1100 with an extended tube magazine, modified to fire full auto. It was used mostly by the Navy SEALS, but I believe SOG made some use of it as well. It's a weapon, as far as I know, that has never been used in a video game. Instead we get the anachronistic SPAS-12 that has appeared in about 5 million games. If anyone is interested in the weapons SOG really did use in Vietnam, get a copy of "SOG: A Photo History of the Secret Wars" by John Plaster. It includes a chapter that specifically covers weapons, and there are ton of great photos. It's expensive, but worth the price.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 02:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:[[Image:MV-FSP-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Ludovici Armstrong ([[Jim Zubiena]]) fires his SPAS-12 at two drug dealers, while posing as a chauffeur.]]

I thought it was supposed to be a homage to 80's action movies. Or at least that's why I'm accepting it, because then I'll feel like I'm in an 80's action movie whenever I play this game. And what would an 80's action movie be without the SPAS-12 or the AUG? [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:22, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== Snake ==
The guy with the AR-15 and the USMC and MACVSOG tattoo the guy looks bad ass, I'm pumped for this dude.

I'm sorry but that sounded a little gay.

== .357 ==

A .357, in a tunnel? I hope the game makes it so you won't be able to hear anything for a few minutes after you fire it, so you'd have to make the choice between shooting the bad guy or just meleeing him. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 19:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

:Anyone noticed reloading animation ? He just throwed out shells ( ''STILL HOLDING FLASLIGHT IN LEFT HAND - VISIBLE'' ) And then moved .357 out of screen ('' STILL HOLDING FLASLIGHT IN LEFT HAND - VISIBLE'' ) and than returned .357 to screen. Fully loaded. So it means he reloads revolver in few seconds with one hand ? ...... I just hope BF:BC2:VIïetnam will be much better.

Hey, I'll take that over reloading ''two'' double barrel shotguns at the same time without dropping one anyday. [[Special:Contributions/67.187.27.89|67.187.27.89]] 04:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

It is a game.

== Grenade Launcher ==

Can anyone identify the grenade launcher used in-game? Here's the link to the video where you can find it. http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2010-call-of/101273 The game labels it "Grenade launcher." It looks like an M203 but that didn't exist in Vietnam...
Also, here's some breaching footage: http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2010-call-of/101260

Yeah they did, they went into service around 1969 I think
:Can't believe I got caught without doing my research. My bad.

It's an M203. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 18:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

== SPAS-12 ==

Anyone noticed (In first gameplay video) that EVEN RUSSIANS are equipped with SPAS-12 ? Can be seen around 2:53 lying on the ground next to russian guy....
:Yeah... This is turning out to be pretty fail...

Guys who cares, achronisms don't kill a game. Does it really matter if the guns are slightly innaccurate, all that matters to me is gamplay, good and fair online and ZOMBIES!!
:Call of Duty has always been accurate in the kinds of guns they present to you in single player, with the exception of Modern Warfare 2. So I think I can speak for many fans of the franchise, it matters to us.

Again..it is a pre-release trailer...game is still 5 months from release...

At least it's European, the Russians in MW2 carried Vectors and TAR-21s. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:24, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== "AR" Sling ==
I'm not one to complain too much about the achronisms, but I do care when things don't make funtional sense, like that the AR's sling, which for some reason is wrapped all around the gun, is stuck UNDER THE BOLT CATCH. It's not like they don't understand it's a funtional part of the gun, cause every AR varient in every COD that's had them has the empty reload where you press the catch... Also I noticed on the non-empty reloads the AR just kinda dips out of the screen and moves a bit then comes back up loaded, you don't see the mag, same goes for the .357; THAT'S lazy... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I liked the AR-15 reload, it looked real. He pressed the mag release, he let the magazine fall to the ground, and he held it there until he put the new mag in. It's alot more realistic than the MW2 reloads, were you wave your gun around the screen while reloading either to look cool or to make it obvious that you are, in fact, reloading your weapon. Most of the time though, people don't do that when they reload in real life, unless they're an idiot. The .357 reload was kinda lazy though, but I let it slide because he actually whips the cylinder back in instead of the light tilt that's all it takes to swing the cylinder back in in MW2 and most other video games. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:35, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I love reading these things to see how much constant griping there is..considering the game is still 5 months from release.

[sarcasm] You don't need to reload your guns if you are black ops, just lower them and they will be full again![/sarcasm] seriously thought, this game is REALLY start to be a dissapoint, and it haven't even been released yet --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 22:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I have noticed weapons in game have muzzle jump. MW2 and COD4 had none the guns stayed on target and took no skill to use. In this even the ar-15s rose. I like it.
:It's just cosmetic rise up, the sights will come back right on target after each shot.

Actually WAW some guns would go off target, like an mp40 or DP machine gun. More noticeable at range. Treyarch has recoil effects, which i like.

:It could just be that modern weapons were designed with a better understanding of reducing recoil. Most modern automatic weapons have straight-line stocks, which reduces recoil, as opposed to bent stocks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually look at mw2 ak, fal, m4, whatever, no recoil. WAW, mp40s would be shooting high after half a mag. I like recoil effects means you need more skill to shoot.

== M16 ==
Unknown [[M16]] ( Seems to be A1 ) covered with some kind of cloth or tape appeared in hands of soldier on one of BO´s artworks.

[[Image:M16-SP1.jpg|thumb|none|400px|M16A1 - 5.56x45mm]]
[[Image:BLACKOPSM16.JPG|thumb|none|500px|M16 on cover of French Xbox 360 magazine.]]

I moved it from the main page because like we discussed earlier, it's just a magazine cover with nothing to back it up. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 11:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
: Yeah, that was nice turn. I added it on the page just because it ''HAD SOMETHING TO DO'' with game :) There arent any proofs that M16 will be featured (''unofrtunately'') --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
::Let's be honest fellas, it's hard to have a game that has much to do with Vietnam without having the old three pronged, triangular handguarded M16. My bet is that it will show up, armed with full auto and 20 round mags. Also, I'm pumped for the G11, that thing is gonna be epicly epic. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:Is it me or is the picture in the magazine a reverse shot? Because I see the forward assist on this A1 as well as the ejection on the right side. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

== Bad Feeling ==

After realizing all the goofs that are popping up and watching more gameplay footage, I'm getting the feeling I got before Modern Warfare 2 released. Like they're throwing what was once a pretty legitimate game out the window for the coolness effect. And with MW2 that feeling turned out to be correct. Anyone else sensing the same thing?

Yeah, I've got the same bad feeling, except a lot sooner than I got it with MW2, maybe just cause I'm not really expecting much better after the disaster that MW2 was. Oh and COD4 is still fun ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

MW2 sucked..but MW2 was IW..CoD:BO is Treyarch. Are they perfect? No..but now a days they're better than IW.

I must say i really enjoyed MW2, and, in my opinion, Infinity Ward is still better than Treyarch, oh well, games can't please everybody, can they? --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 11:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully multiplayer is a bit different, mw2 multiplayer was old when it started since it was just like cod 4, at least WAW had vehicles.

-k9870

With luck they'll fix the problems '''before''' the game ships this time. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 16:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
:I hope you're right but I doubt it. I've never seen a game change much of anything five months before release.

Everyone here talking shit about IW? You're a bunch of idiots. IW makes far better games. I don't know why you don't like MW2, but it's one of the best of the series so far. This game, on the other hand, looks like it'll be a disaster (as nearly all of Treyarch's iterations are).
:Fuckin right.--[[User:Pølaris|Pølaris]] 03:47, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say I hated MW2. Doesn't stop it being loaded with bugs that make the game seem like it was rushed out to meet the deadline. Now, if you're done fanboying... [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 07:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::I don't think it's entirely fanboyish. I'm pretty sure the general consensus of CoD fans is that IW games are better than Treyarch games. IW started the franchise, and CoD games are the only games they make. Treyarch is just along for the ride. But now that IW has lost almost a third of their employees in the last month, that dynamic may change. I have a lot of hope for BO, and I think it's silly to write it off based on a few trailers and three minutes of gameplay footage. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 12:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::: My point was that MW2 was ruined by Acitvision trying to force IW to meet the due date, meaning they had to ship it with a whole range of bugs. However, some of the above poster's comments do seem to boil down to "It's gonna be shit cos it's not an IW game."[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 07:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I personally think that this game looks awesome, and i dont see what the problem is

IW gets the cred since they made the modern games, which people wanted. WW2 was old that siad Treyarch couldve done just as good making mw1 and 2. They had better fire lighting, recoil effects, etc.

:Bottom line is this. IW failed to have MW2 be better than CoD: 4, and this is why they've been put on hold. Treyarch's WaW was a brilliant game, and I still love to play it to this day. Treyarch has shown more promise then IW lately, and I'm sure they won't disapoint with Black Ops, as they plan to remove and fix all the shit MW2 got wrong. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:: Let's replace your opinion with some fact. MW2 was better than CoD 4 based on the storyline and sales alone, without going into all the new multiplayer features. Was multiplayer a bit buggy? Yeah, for around a month. Treyarch's installments are considered, by those who have played the series, crap in comparison. WaW? That game was garbage. It was basically a recycling of levels from other games in the series that were reskinned. The game was a knockoff of CoD4 that took place in WWII.
:::I'm going to have to call BS on the better storyline in MW2. It's the first CoD game where you get to not only gun down civilians, but also kill American servicemen. That's better? Are you and your buddies playing MW2 in a cave in Kandahar? Big Red One was disappointing, but then again, it wasn't supposed to be a "real" CoD game. CoD3 did suck, I certainly won't argue that. I hated the idea of WaW at first, because WWII was so overdone, but I liked it once I actually played it. (There might be a lesson in there.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Now let's talk about Treyarch. Aside from their lameass 'cash-in' port of CoD4 for the wii (which was garbage), what did they do in the series? Call of Duty 3, Big Red One, World at War, and the current work in progress Black Ops. I don't know if you played any of those, but they were all terrible entries in the series. CoD3 was a gimmick game. 'Oooooh motion control and button mashing'. Big Red One was garbage, and WaW was a hack-job. What does that record suggest their next game will be like?

: Big Red One was awesome, shut up.-protoAuthor 18:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and Treyarch couldn't have made MW1 or 2. They lack originality; every game they released was a knockoff of either IW's designs and ideas or of another developer. The only reason Treyarch is getting to make more CoD's is because IW's execs left because they were being denied their contractually obligated bonuses. --[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 11:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
::Your timeline is off. Development of BO started well before the recent upheaval at IW. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

:Also, World at War is a superb game. Sure you have the god like MP40, but that's nowhere near as bad as OMA danger close noob tubes in MW2, and to anybody who's into WWII and it's weapons it's a hell of a game. It's no CoD: 4, but thank fuck it's no MW2. Treyarch shows promise, and if IW was doing Black Ops I would hold no hope at all. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

No offense but what your saying is that WAW was great in comparison. Thats not good logic at all, CoD4 is the best out of the three. No clue on BO but I have a feeling that since they wanted to justify cool guns that are anchoristic with that they are prototypes is just half-assed which may relate to the rest of the game. Also have you seen the reload animations?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
:When WaW was first announced, I was appalled. I couldn't believe they were staying in WWII, even after CoD4 skipped ahead to modern day. Looking back though, the fact that it's a WWII game is the only flaw I can think of. (Although, yes, it's a big one.) It restricted the plot, and WWII has been done to death. It was otherwise a pretty good game. I really liked the co-op campaign missions, the vehicle missions were well done, the voice acting was superb, and Zombies takes the game to a whole new level. Aside from the setting, is CoD4 really that much better? Is it time to give Treyarch the benefit of the doubt? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:48, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

:I agree with all of your points chinaman, and you're right, CoD 4 wasn't really all that better. Besides the modern warfare setting, it lacked many of the cool features and such that WaW introduced, and while everyone including me loves it, it wasn't overly better than WaW. I always applauded Treyarch for making WaW not so noob friendly, something IW did massively with MW2. Now the guys at Arch have been watching people complain everywhere about the shit in MW2, and so they know what to do to fix it. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

== Goofs and screw-ups ==
Alright no offense but SHUT UP!!! You guys are complaining about the anachroistic guns in it but it's supposed to be that way. The freaking name is BLACK-OPS which means no one knows about it. What they are doing are saying what Cpt. Price said: History is full of lies. So, what they're saying is that this is not what they thought really happened but they are using their imagination to come with these historical ideas that fall in to the game. But like I said everything in it is supposed to TOP SECRET, so it's going to be anachroistic. But that's how it's supposed to be. It's TOP SECRET so none of us would even know about it.

and P.S. For all butt-holes who said MW2 sucks, Opinions are like butt-holes every body's got one, and nobody wants to hear the other one. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 12:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

: Yeah. You act like 12-years old. But we all know you are 10 years old.
::For your information I am actually 12.

Look up mw2 bad spawns on youtube and you'll see how its flawed. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

::I take it that you don't want fans of the COD series to actually question the developers for making questionable (or stupid) weapons choices for the sake of a compelling narrative. Unfortunately, that only works if we didn't have already have lots of knowledge of the 1960s-1970s era of covert operations from the military and numerous books, which only makes the anachronisms more glaring to anyone who isn't 12 years old.Just like movie watchers, people playing games set in a particular historical era have a certain set of expectations of what ought to be present and what shouldn't. To dismiss all those concerns with a "TOP SECRET" excuse is ridiculous, since Call of Duty 1-3 all managed to be interesting without adding things that didn't exist in the same timeframe. Cursing at people because they disagree doesn't make your defence of Treyarch seem anything more than juvenile. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 16:52, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

No, I just wanted everybody to shut up about saying crap about the guns. So they maybe think that a AUG without a foregrip looks stupid, I think it looks cool. The graphics look good and it looks realistic. I am 12 so I don't care about anachrosism, but I know a heck of alot about guns and Call of Duty so yeah, I was a little mad but because alot of you guys are like in your thirties they are targeting this for people in the younger phase and are not expecting people to go Hey! The AR-15 wasn't introduced then and neither was the Grenade Launcher. I don't think Treyarch are expecting a Riot of AUG foregrip lovers to burn down their studio but come on guys, seriously. Do you have to take this that seriously, your calling me juvenile while your sitting in your chair going hey that trigger guard is rounde then it can't be a M9 so it has be a 92SB therefore they lied! I'm going to kill them! etc. etc. so hey try to be a little compassionate and maybe think about going outside your mom's basement. Ha Ha just joking. (not sarcasm) So what i'm saying is can you not be so depndive on every little detail. Would you like to make a Call of Duty game. Just please voice your honest opinions and not go on about gun mixups because it's really not about the guns it's more about the plot and story. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 18:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I think that you people are taking these things too seriously. Since cod 4, these games are like action movies, rather than historical war role-playing type shit. Yes the anachronisms are disappointing, but I'm not really bothered by it and they were done for the sake of making the game cooler (and in my opinion any game set in Vietnam AND including a spas-12 is badass). If you want realism, than check out the new Medal of Honor. If you want Hollywood type action, buy cod games, because thats the direction the franchise is going in, which isnt a bad thing.

:Alright kiddies, let's sit down and have a nice list of what's wrong with Modern Warfare 2.
-One Man Army
-Danger Close M203s
-Commando
-The Spawn system
-Deathstreaks (especially Painkiller)
-Overpowered and unbalanced guns (ACR, FAMAS, UMP)
-Overpriced map packs
-non-dedicated servers, which leads to lag and host migration up you yin yang
-the OMA/Danger Close noob tube combo
-boosters galore
-10 Prestige hack lobbies
-The F2000 is a pile of garbage

So all said and done, that's a pretty big list of whats wrong with the game. You're free to disagree, but let it be known anyone claiming noob tubes are legit will be lynched. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The new Metal of Honor is just trying to cash in on the whole Modern Warfare craze we got going. Modern Warfare is the new WWII game of this generation. And because this IS a site that points out specific weapons, whether or not it should exist in the time period is our jobs on this site. Those of us who do take this site serious has an obligation to point out the holes and inconsistencies. That's what we do here. Call it bitching or whining, but that's what this site is solely for, nitpicking, pointing out obvious holes when we see guns in a movie, game, etc. We're looked up all sorts of history involving the AR-15 and just saying it's "Black ops" doesn't mean they defy the laws of historical consistency. In some of the Indiana Jones movies that takes place before WWII, we do point out MP40s and 98Ks should not exist as a fact. Even black ops of today would use the latest technology, not weapons that haven't been field tested or even made yet. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

: You, Excalibur, look like one of those very few inteligent people in this discussion. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 09:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

:I agree. Also, I've seen Beta footage and Medal of Honor just looks a lot like Bad Company 2. And to be honest, I could care less if the AUG or AR-15 or what have you is an anachronism in this game, as long as we're not talking lasers I'm fine. We're here to point out weapons in film, give pictures and descriptions of them, and talk about them, not bitch that a gun being in a game set 2 days before it was produced makes it a failure [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:: Those guns arent 2 days befor prouction. Its ''8 years''. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 09:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Pointing out achronistic guns is part of what we do here, that said, for me it won't kill the game, unless there's a Modern Warfare 2-like pile of other stuff wrong with it too. Oh and yes the Russians & Vietnamese wouldn't use SPAS-12s but you're forgetting the only guns they've REALLY intended to show off so far are the AUG, SPAS-12, AK-47, M202, Python, and Crossbow, that's only what, six? I think they only picked these few guns to go in the trailers, and then reveal more later, so maybe the guns will be more where they should in the final version... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, God forbid we talk about firearm mistakes in TV/Movies/Video Games on a website DEDICATED TO DISCUSSING FIREARMS IN TV/MOVIES/VIDEOGAMES! I will continue to make comments on what, in my opinion, are idiotic firearm choices for this game. If anyone disagrees, feel free to reply, but don't tell me to shut up. Some of the comments above just prove my theory that weapons, such as the SPAS-12, were simply included because they are popular in video games, with Treyarch using the whole "prototype" B.S. as justification for their presence.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 05:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:Yes, how DARE they try to give players what they want?! You'd think they were in this to make money or something. What a bunch of whores! --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
::Really? So the only way for this game to make money is to include a SPAS-12? Is there that much demand for a SPAS-12 it has to be inluded to make gamers happy? Would the game be a financial failure if it wasn't there, and weapons more appropriate to the time period were included instead?--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 06:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You said it yourself, it's what players want. And like you also said, it's minor. Games are made for the general public, not gun dorks like us. As a gun dork, I'm a bit bothered, but as a gamer, I'm thrilled that I can light people on fire with a shotgun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 09:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC) (gun dork and gamer)
^Hell yeah! [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 23:44, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

:::: Does the success of the game depend that much on specific weapons that appear in it? You said yourself that as long as a game is fun, accurate/inaccurate depictions of weapons doesn't matter that much. If that's the case, weapons more correct to the time period can be included, and the game will still be a success ''as long as it's fun''. And I highly doubt Treyarch polled gamers and asked them what weapons they wanted to see in Black Ops. I think they were just acting on their ''perception'' of what weapons are popular in video games. So I don't know if I can say this is a case of "what players want", more a case of Treyarch saying "we think we know what players want". This is just a theory I came up with as to why certain weapons were included, I don't have any idea if it's true(although some comments from other posts seem to confirm it). For all I know, Treyarch is just being lazy and it's easier for them to include the well known weapons rather than do real research. At any rate, I can't see the inclusion/exclusion of specific weapons making or breaking a game.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 01:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::"At any rate, I can't see the inclusion/exclusion of specific weapons making or breaking a game." My thoughts exactly. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You know, those that find it stupid that we are pointing out the anachronisms in this game should really just go to the treyarch forums, not post on a website dedicated to firearm identification. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:32, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:Ok, if those anachronistic weapons supposed to be '''early''' prototypes then they at least could make it look '''different''' from production models! That would be much more believable. Tryesuckarch is just being f-ing lazy. I don't mind flat-top AR, but they could make it not look like a modern one. And also if there is no simple M16A1 then it's a total fck-up in the Vietnam themed game.
::If they made it look different5 from the final gun, you guys would be even more pissed! You'd be like "How can they call that a M16A1! Look at it it looks nothing like the original!" Plus. how could Treynot-suckarch know what they would like? You guys wouldn't be pissed if this was a modern warfare game. In fact I bet that Treyarch probably wanted to do that but they couldn't(breathes deeply)you know what this is my last comment. I'm done arguing with all the stupid people on this site. If you have anything else to say you can take it up with me on my talk page. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 13:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You don't know what you're talking about. Photos or drawings of the prototypes can easily be found on the internet. A drawing of the AUG prototype is on the World Guns page, and the prototype SPAS-12(along with a photo of the SPAS-11) is shown on the SPAS-12 webpage: [http://spas12.com/spas12not.htm] And if Treyarch clearly states a weapon is supposed to represent a prototype and it actually looks like the prototype, no one is going to complain.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 00:09, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

:Are these mistakes any worse than some of MW2s fuck ups? Like the L86 with a made up drum magazine and iron sights that wouldn't be usable as it has a straight stock, the AUG cosmetically having a 30 round mag when it says 42? The MP5K having a rail system only seen on an airsoft gun in real life and so on. Let's remember Black Ops isn't set only in 1968, and so they have a bit of play when it comes to weapons. The M16 is confirmed (I have a friend doing beta testing) and is Vietnam styled. Now if anyone wants to instantly write off the game because it has a few anachronisms and shit in it, then your missing the point. So what if your using an AUG in 1968? It's not like lasers in WWI, and it's still fun to do. Don't focus on the hate, try and just enjoy it for what it is, a video game. If you want reality, go join the army and head off to Iraq or something, cause in video game land, reality will be broken. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]
:So you're trying to justify Treyarch fuckups comparing it to MW2? Fuckup is fuckup

One, I tottaly agree. Two, did your friend say if there is an M14?

:Yes, the M14 should be in there. Also, I hardly see mild anachronisms as "fuck ups" in a game that pretty much goes on alternate reality anyways. Treyarch has created a game all about the operations we don't know about, the cover ups, and the spec ops weaponry we don't see for years, so having an AUG earlier then it's commercial release can be forgiven. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]\

::Treyarch has the right to depict an alternate Cold War for all they desire, but as long as they try to play it off as the historical "truth" that no one knows about while maintaining all sorts of obvious (and IMO not minor at all) anachronisms, they are only leaving themselves open to criticism. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 23:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

:They aren't trying to play it off as historical truth, they're trying to go with an alternate truth, which makes perfect sense. Also, if I hear another person commenting on how rails are anachronistic, I'm going to snap. It's fucking rails on a gun in a video game, get over it. Black Ops will be an awesome game, and despite these possible anachronisms, I'll be gladly killing Russians in 1968 with my AUG thank you [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

I don't think I'm going to get this game. I'm getting a vibe that it's filled with silly crap much like Modern Warfail 2. I'll be playing the next Medal of Honor instead. -Frank T

:Medal of Honor looks like Bad Company 2 with Taliban, so that's the game I won't be getting. Treyarch impressed me with World at War, and they're aiming to please this time, removing and modifying all the bullshit Modern Warfare 2 bestowed on us. From deathstreaks to Commando, they're out to fix it all! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

I never really got that mindset "It's BFBC2 but slightly different so I'm not getting it". Well, if you don't like Bad Company 2 to begin with that's fine, but there's more of a difference between Bad Company 2 and Medal Of Honor than between COD4 and World At War, most of the difference was the setting so it seemed like a bigger difference, but the core gameplay was very close, and they were made by two DIFFERENT companys while BFBC2 and MOH are made by the SAME ONE. I'm not saying anything bad about them, I like the first three and the MOH Beta. And yes, Modern Warfare 2 failed in two ways: First, it was WAY too noob-friendly, like, before it came out I would've never thought it possible for a game to be that noob-friendly, and second, it traded realism for coolness in pretty much every way, while COD4, the game they'd JUST MADE, had a believable story, weapons that were almost perfect in terms of appearance and who used them, and the only real nooby stratagy was the M16 Red Dot, but oh well, there was almost only that one. I know Treyarch has said they're trying to get rid of the cheap MW2 stuff, and that's good, but I'm really not liking the direction this is going, picking the guns because they're cool and not because they make sense, even a little bit, the exploding crossbow bolts, how almost every weapon we've identified so far is either achronistic or has something wrong with it (go look), the Hind A with tandam seating, and when you get in you go through the long cool animation of getting in and starting up, but then it takes off in 2 seconds flat, and the lazy, lazy reloads... I'm not saying it's going to suck, I'm saying my hopes aren't high, sure it'll be better than MW2, but that's not saying much. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:36, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

:Arguably Black Ops has issues, but don't forget that E3 footage comes months before the final product. So what if the Hind has tandem seating, does that make it any less cool to blast VC with it? So what if the reload isn't uber detailed, does that detract from you shooting people? So what if there's minor anachronisms, isn't this both a video game and an alternate reality? I'll agree the crossbow is kind of odd, but this game should be nowhere near as noob friendly as the god awful MW2. Modern Warfare 2 was built on the idea of helping bad players, but it only resulted in much rage for good players such as myself. Call of Duty 4 was made to break the mold on FPs games of the time, and it did and still does kick ass. MW2 was built to top it, and instead of that, they gave us an over dramatic, noob friendly game that overall makes me just want to buy a copy of CoD 4 again. And on MOH, I've seen some footage, and now I actually like it, sure it looks BC2 like, but thats no biggy, and overall that looks ready to rock too! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Okay, sorry, that came off as too bad against Black Ops, I know it's months away from coming out and no, the Hind's seating isn't really a problem, I was just pointing out that it was wrong, same with a lot of the stuff we've seen so far. My point was there's a lot of incorrect things in the game, not neccecarily game-breaking, just pointing out that COD4 and WAW were better in that regard, though so far the game overall looks pretty good :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:29, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

:To be really honest, it won't matter if there's minor issues and anachronisms, cause as long as Black Ops isn't as noob friendly and shitty as MW2, I'll be fine and dandy [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Exactly, but we still do need to point them out though. ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 08:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I dont see MW2 as "noob friendly", just as balanced. It tried too hard to make no gun any better than another. It also felt like cod4, like the core gameplay mechanics were all old when you started playing.

-k9870

:Face it dude, MW2 basically reeks of noob friendliness. You have deathstreaks, solely designed to help shitty players, noob tubes which when coupled with OMA and danger close are the noobs cannon of choice. You have the ACR and FAMAS, both of which are overpowered, then you get stuff like the UMP which at close range does more damage then an M4 Carbine. Not to mentionthe marathon lightweight commando set up used by knife fags so they can knife you from 12 feet away. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

And the overpowered Harriers, that killed everyone all the time and you could have 2 up at once, and they always beat the helos in fights, and Chopper Gunner, and Tactical Insertions, allowing people to boost really easily for the Nuke, that ended the game, and Slight Of Hand Pro that let everyone quickscope, yeah the list keeps going... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I always find a stinger to be good against harriers and because you can have 2 on you, most of the time, you can take even 2 of them out. Not Gunner choppers are a pain to take down [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 20:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

:Chopper gunners are a pain, AC-130s are worse. Not only can they not be hit by bullets or tubes or anything of that sort, but they have TWO sets of flares that can deploy without any delay. Tact inserts mixed with cold blooded and good old FFA is great for boosting, luckily now Sandy Ravage deals some booster justice (hell, even I serve justice to them now). Either way though, MW2 was clearly IW's attempt to top CoD: 4, which was a game built to revolutionize FPS games. MW2 was built to be playable by even the noobiest kids, over the top, reference movies every two seconds, and overall be a fairly shitty game. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The problem with the Harriers is they're way too good... unless you just pull out a stinger and then they're dead, which is a little too extreme both ways. The reason the helicopter was so much better in COD4 was because there were no guided rockets, you couldn't shoot the rotor (so you couldn't just hipfire the thing to death), and UAV Jammer didn't help you against it, it killed you anyway, not to mention it never seems to manage to hit you in MW2. What I hate is hearing "Helicopter Inbound", then seeing it shot down in literally 5 seconds... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:05, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Death streaks were only like 10 seconds long and didnt bother me, no guns were eoverpowered, there all balanced, too much if you ask me. C130s were easy to hide from and rare to see and i downed tons of harries with stingers. The noob tube didnt bother me, i used a m16 with m203 and iron sights as my primary weapon. Knife noobs are easy to shoot The problem was cheap tactics, like camping spawn points and getting your friends to camp with you in free for all so you could stab them and boost your way to a nuke.

-k9870

The only streak thats ten seconds long is painkiller, and it still sucks. The ACR has no recoil and can outshoot sniper rifles, so can the FAMAS. AC-130s are easy to hide from on SOME maps, but if you get spawn trapped outside, your screwed. The fact you use a noob tube on your primary gun choice sickens me, because ANYONE who uses them, unless to get the shotgun unlocked or in a tactical, non spam way is a complete noob and should be banned for using such a cheap weapon. Knife noobs are easy to shoot at times, but if they get within ten feet, commando is your demise. MW2 is a shit game, end of story, Black Ops is doing everything to solve the problems it caused, amen. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The m203 is useful to launch through windows and take out campers, and i use iron sights so might as well have an attachment. I dont use the m203 as my primary, but have it on my primary. And the ACR has low power at range taking on snipers. I countersniper with my m16 though, love irons, they have no sway like a scope. I hate snipers the most, there like socially acceptable campers. Its funny to lay out some noob who tries to quickscope though. It seems like no matter what you get called a noob though, m4 noob, noob tuber, shotgun noob, dual wield noob, knife noob....it seems everyoned thinks if yo dont use whaty they do your a noob, and c-130s dont bother me, there rare, people need 13 kills to get them. I hated when i tried to play free for all with some friends in a party and people are just boosting to nukes each round and cheating there asses off

[[user:k9870]]

agreed. it is always considered noobing. Snipers are annoying. it takes no skill at all to snipe. however there are worse things in MW2 then Snipers. for example- the people who camp in buildings like Wasteland or Scrapyard. "noob tubers" really arent annoying at all anyway. aggravating maybe, but if someone hits you with a M203 its your fault anyway. you should have been more alert. [[Special:Contributions/71.194.219.9|71.194.219.9]] 22:48, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

People always camped hallways and alleys and just shot anyone coming around the corner. Easy to just poke in and launch 40 mil at them. Besides, the thing has an aring distance, you need to arc it at range and reload was slow. Balanced.\

-k9870

:Face it, the M203 is a noob piece of shit. the combo of an M203 with Danger Close and OMA makes you a mini artillery battery. Also, how are you supposed to dodge a tube when people are shooting them cross map to your spawn? Nothing says pro like getting hit by a 40mm grenade shot hundreds of feet over buildings into your face. The M203 has no place in MW2, and I'd be one to have it removed. If retards can't use guns well, don't give them bullshit to help them, let them suck and they'll quit the game. When I pull my FAL out, I feel like a pro, knowing everyone else has the overpowered ACR and FAMAS and the tubes out, all ready to be scrubs, while I'm using something that's balanced and yet awesome. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Well said, though I wish the G3 was still in, and the fact that the ACR does a little less damage, like 1 bullet, maybe two different, makes no difference when there's absolutly no recoil, they still can't do anything by the time you kill them across the map from one huge sustained burst... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:37, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Are you all playing hardcore or something? And i have no people launching 203s around problem, you only get 2. And i could care less about harriers and 130s, you need a lot of kills to get them. There is a call of duty cultuure to nae some guns as oaky and some as cheap. I dont give a shit personally though. i just play. No matter what somebody will bitch about your gear.

I remember back when everyone hated p90s, that thing had no range or power and overall sucked.

You only get two M203s if your not using scavenger or the more common One Man Army. I literally see two or three people on my team per game using that stupid backpack, it's complete bullshit. The ACR may not do high damage, but it's high rate of fire and zero recoil means you can full auto the damn thing at any range. I think retards who dare to say the noob tube is a legit way to play should be banned from PSN or XBL and never allowed on any Call of Duty again. It's called a first person shooter, not first person grenade launchers. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
:I wasn't aware that we can't SHOOT grenade launchers. I better go tell the guys at Activision/IW/Treyarch. -Chris_Hun7er 02:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The problem is more that games are good and balenced when everything has a place, if people start using snipers at close range and beating shotguns (that's more of a Halo thing, but the snipers quickscope and the shotguns are rather terrible), or shooting 40mm rounds at any range for any reason, it's dumb. The launchers in BFBC2 are well balenced, because they have a purpose and they fill it, and nothing else. The assault rifles in MW2 have a purpose, fill it, and then beat SMGs and shotguns at close range, and half the time snipers at long range. And the Javelin, not that I see it too much, is good against tanks, except, there aren't any, there's infantry and helicopters. A game works when things have a purpose and fill that purpose, but not anything else's purpose, and that's half of what's screwed up in MW2. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:36, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

:Excactly Alex. Bad company 2 had 40mms that had to virtually land on the person to kill them, but with Danger Close an MW2 noob tube will kill people even if they're up to fifteen feet away from the landing. To be honest, I think noob tubes should just be plain removed from Black Ops, and the tube fanboys can suck it while us normal players use our guns. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
:Reality is fanboy the US 40mm rounds have a 5 meter kill radius. meaning that if you are 15 feet away from the blast you are dead as a doornail. the 40mm grenades in bad company are more useful as doorway makers and cover destroyers than as proper suport weapons. what is pissing off alot of us who care about little things called historic accuracy is the fact that even though they say that everyone had to read about MACV:SOG they have gotten few details right. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 18:44, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

It's true that the 40mm is not terribly powerful in BC2, but explosives need to be less powerful in games than they would in real life, imagine Claymores with realistic spread, damage, and range, without those stupid little lasers, and without bomb squad. Or frag grenades, they're overspammed as it is. Doing something like that is less realistic, but needed for the game to work. Having something like and AUG in 1968, or a SPAS-12 used by Vietcong around the same time... not so much. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

:I agree Alex, because Claymores are really designed to take out a huge radius of enemies, it could easily wipe out an eight man squad. and a frag in a 10 by 10 room would really kill everything inside. If they went for realism, all the 5.56 assault rifles in MW2 would have the same damage and virtually the same recoil, but for balance the TAR is portrayed as extremely powerful, and the ACR weak. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Yeah, it just bothered me that they were THAT different, they could have chosen different weapons if they wanted to balence them like that or something, the part that bugs me the most is that COD4 was better balenced AND made more sense, it's just such a step back... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

All you people whining and crying about grenade launchers and snipers need to quit bitching and cowboy up. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:38, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Grenade launchers are balanced, mininum detonation range, slow reload, not very accurate (need to arc) only 2 rounds, and besides, use it to take down campers.

== Linked to World at War ==

It has been conformed that Reznov from World at War will appear in this game and even make comments about Dimitri Petrenko. This was seen on the Call of Duty Wiki

:Yes, as Reznov is more or less confirmed to be the bearded man you meet and then split from in the tunnel rat scene at E3. I'm happy to see him back, as he made World at War even better for me, maybe now he'll continuously yell "Fire the Javelin!" [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::"now he'll continuously yell "Fire the Javelin!"" What's a Javelin doing in the cold war? Oh wait I forgot, it must be a secret prototype no one knew about.

:Alright, I was thinking in an MW2 state of mind, lemme see. I know, how about him always yelling "FIRE THE LAW" in your ear every two seconds when something as small as a jeep shows up
[[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Any links to zombies?

== Has it occured to anyone that the AR-15 variant is probably custom made? ==

Treyarch has said that these guys could have guns custom built just for them, which I feel explains things much more adequately than just saying that they're prototypes of future (to them) guns. My theory is that he had a CAR-15 custom made with a flat-top reciever for tactical reasons. Maybe this caught on with the rest of the team, and whatever manufacturer they got to make these guns for them sold the idea later on. Of course this is just an excuse for the guns having the rails just to free it up for attacthments in Multiplayer, but at least there is some kind of excuse. Unfortunately this theory doesn't cover the anachronistic appearances of the SPAS-12 and the AUG, but hey, no game ever get's all of it's guns 100% correct. 

Edit: Actually it just might explain the AUG, because all it really is is a combination of ideas taken from the Enfield EM-2, 
Korobov TKB-022, and several other abandoned designs from before or shortly after World War 2. The only thing it doesn't explain is why it has the production-style built in telescopic sight, instead of the original prototypes open sights:
[[http://world.guns.ru/assault/aug_pr1.gif]]

:I can deal with the CAR-15 because it's at least ''plausible'', but the "SOG got it first" excuse doesn't work with the guns that didn't yet exist. The AUG isn't just a customized version of another gun, it's a standalone design on its own. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:48, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

== For those of you who may be confused about the supposed MP5/UMP hybrid ==

This is what I'm talkin about: 

[[Image:CODBO-SMG.jpg]] 

As you can see, it appears that it has the reciever and magazine housing of an MP5 or MP5K, while the barrel housing (correct me if I'm incorrect in calling it that) looks like that of a somewhat shortened UMP. If you look closely, you will note that it has the MP5Ks finger guard (I'm guessing that's what that is) directly below the muzzle that looks like a cut down version of the full handguard found in this picture: 

[[Image:MP5Kprototype.JPG]] 

My point is I don't think it's a hybrid at all, merely an MP5K missing it's forward vertical grip, for some reason or another. And seeing as every other aspect of the gun is that of an MP5Ks, I think it's safe to say that's what it is, so I'm gonna change it to that on the front page. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 16:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

It ain't a hybrid, it is a real gun altogether. After doing some research I think I've found the gun or rather guns that it could potentially be. My first guess is:
*The H&K SMGI & II
http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=103:smg-i-a-ii&catid=11:rare-prototypes&Itemid=5
*And second guess being the MP5 PIP
http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=102:mp5-pip&catid=11:rare-prototypes&Itemid=5
[[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 19:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

== G11 ==

Anyone else as excited as I am for the inclusion of the G11? [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 19:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
:Just another anachronistic gun. Thats all. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 04:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I sure as heck am. --[[User:AK-74Fan|AK-74Fanc]] 23:18, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Eh the gun itself isn't that big of a deal to me, but I definitely am excited to see something that to my knowledge hasn't been in an FPS before. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 23:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
: Well, it have appeared already in few other FPS games. For example [[Delta Force: Land Warrior]], [[Global Operations]], [[IGI 2: Covert Strike]] or Code of Honor: The French Foreign Legion --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 04:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
::Those games are not up to the modern standard, though. ;) [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 12:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

:Really, you could say this is the G11s first appearance in a well known game, and will finally show it off to the masses. I love the weapon itself, and to see it finally make a big appearance like this makes me quite happy.[[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The G11 was in Syphon Filter 2 [[Special:Contributions/98.237.107.108|98.237.107.108]] 02:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Can someone link me the video of the G11 being used? I don't want to search through all the reposts and copies of other videos.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 13:23, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

== XM214 Microgun ==

Since it's going to cover the Vietnam era, and the way these types of games like to go over the top, do you think there's a chance that the XM214 Microgun is going to make an appearance? I know it was only a prototype, and was it was made in the 70's, but I thought I read somewhere that the SF guys tried it out only to find that it was not feasable having a gun fire at 4,000 rpm.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 03:14, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

:I think putting a Minigun in the game would be kind of stupid. I mean sure they could make it heavy and awkward to carry, but that thing would simply decimate anyone in it's path, whether they're behind light cover, in a vehicle or just in the open. I'd love one, but methinks not. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::Not to mention it's impossible to actually fire one with live rounds. -Mandaloin

== A more plausable fictional AR-15 ==

I can understand a frankengun, like some special forces guy back then would take several kinds of AR-15 designs and mash them together until he gets an awesome gun that works. And being special forces, they can get whatever they want to suit their mission, so it would make sense for whatever they take to not be standard issue or that it is known, but I don't like the flip up iron sights since I don't know when flip up irons came about or the flat top receiver. It's like they just took a Colt Model 933 and replaced the stock with an old style stock from the CAR-15. I mean, put a telescoptic stock on an M16A1 rifle, or A2 upper reliever on the Car-15 and swap out the pistol grip or something. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:16, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

:That would make sense considering the special forces style of the game. Also, Sonny (from Deadliest warrior and such) was on as an advisor for Spetsnaz and tactics, so look for both some epic Spetsnaz moves and even a character of him in game! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Do we even officially know yet what model AR-15 it is, aside of course from the flattop reciever and flip-up sights? [[Special:Contributions/67.187.27.89|67.187.27.89]] 02:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It pretty much is a Colt Model 933 without a brass deflector or forward assist, which actual does not exist. I have not seen a flat top reciever without the forward assist and the brass deflector. I don't even think flip up irons were invented back then. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I mean if they threw in a CAR-15 tricked out like the ones seen in Black Hawk Down, I'd have no complaints [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:04, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
:+1. but they though it would look too bulky from first person perspective.

agreed. that movie was amazing. i wouldnt even care if you couldnt use the tac-lights but still the CAR-15s they had in that movie were amazing. does anyone no what the difference between CAR-15 and Colt Commando models are??? [[Special:Contributions/24.15.103.231|24.15.103.231]] 23:55, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
:I associate the CAR-15 with the XM177 style flash hider and the Commando to me is the M733 for it's short barrel [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:55, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

== New weapons! ==

Here's [[http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/File:GunWall.png]] a pic of a bunch of airsoft guns Treyarch has on a wall in their studio which pretty much confirms that they'll be in the game. 
From left to right, starting at the top: 
-M16A2 (?) 
-MAC-10 w/ supressor 
-AUG 
-Mini-Uzi 
-L85 
-Scorpion SA Vz 61 
-AKs-74u 
-Another Skorpion 
-SPAS-12 
-MP5 (?) 

Not sure exactly what the MP5 is doing as there already is the K variant prototype, and no idea what the HELL the M16A2 is doing there as there's already an M16A1 AND a CAR-15. What do you all think?
Sorry it's a bit blurry.

It could be a very blurry M16A1 or maybe because they somehow can bullshit their way into saying they got a prototype M16A2. And I prefer us to use the full size MP5 again. Looks like they got an L85 here. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:59, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

: That pic is here too :) Check out "extras" section in article :D

:The L85 got my gun-boner up, been wanting that since the MW2 L86 LSDisapointment. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::Dude, put that away. :P [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 12:23, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

We might also see the Browning HP because of the rumored "Iranian Hostage Situation" level. [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]

:I wouldn't be surprised, but if I see another Desert Eagle, then I'll have to wtf. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::Deagle prototype and AA12 prototype + level is moved to Buckingham Pallace to add more drama to the game. [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]
:::Sorry, Buck Palace? Explain this? I assume this is a rumour, since so far Operation Nimrod has yet to be confirmed aswell. Sounds interesting though (if a little rediculous and implausible)
::::just kidding. I just jumped on the Black Ops bandwagon [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]

Im guessing the a2 is used since its more availible and when they do motion capture it would look the same. showing how someone moves with a m16 s what they're looking for,

:Also, the footage showing the Spetsnaz game models doing rolls shows the player holding and firing a clearly Vietnam era M16A1, so that's there for sure. Also, I do believe the Iranian Embassy raid will be tacked on much like Mile high Club in CoD 4, simple as a fun epilogue style bonus mission. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

"Black Ops is said to be set in various locations, including Vietnam and Cuba, [3] and judging from weaponry and dates given in the trailer, it is set between 1960 and 2010."
a quote from here: http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Call_of_Duty:_Black_Ops

I really hope there's a Browning HP, cause it's cool and cause I'm Canadian lol. It might be in to be honest because in COD4 the Overkill and Last Stand pics had a Glock and then it was added in MW2, and the Overkill pic in WAW was a Browning HP :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:56, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I hope its just "iranian embassy raid inspired", not the real thing, i want more than 6 guys to shoot.

:This is Call of Duty, so you'll always have plenty of enemies to shoot. And yeah Alex, as a fellow Canadian, a Hi-Power would be a nice handgun to have in the game, and period correct. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

As much as I love the Hi Power and actually owning one, I don't want to see one in a game such as call of duty just because of the attention it will recieve from nerds spamming videos on youtube "HEY THIS GUN IS IN CALL OF DUTY!!!!1" It gets really annoying and that kind of attention seems negative to those that actually collect guns. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

:Partially agree with you there. I hate the attention guns get from these games (and suddenly every 12 year old becoming a firearms expert [yes, obviously the M16 is better than the AUG just because CoD says so]) but, I enjoy being able to play with them. Win some, loose some. Well, one or two firearms forums have noticed a HUGE increase in the number of people looking for the 'ACR'. As have a few rifle stores in the 'States that I know of have been plagued by idiot teens looking for hi-tech military grade gear...

I hope there is a HP, they need a 9mm gun for MP (more ammo, less recoil, but less damage) and Id rather see a cool gun then a lame generic beretta coming in.

I wouldn't mind seeing a Browning HP, (heck Indiana Jones used one, who wouldn't?) But then again it may look just a little bit too similar to the M1911 that's already confirmed for this game, so it's addition might be just a little visually redundant. [[Special:Contributions/67.187.27.89|67.187.27.89]] 05:04, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

:Hi-power and m1911...look similar? It sounds like "Elephant&Rhino look alike" or "M16 looks like AK 47".

I said they look similar. Not exactly alike. Besides, when it comes to COD, all of the guns are supposed to be easily distinguishable on the fly. If they gave one a different finish it'd be perfectly fine.

:Maybe so, maybe not, but all I'd like to hope is that the bloody ACR doesn't return, or else I'm burning down Treyarch studios. Honestly, MW2 just had cool and shiny guns that everyone would like, as opposed to realistic and proper guns used by militaries and militias. Of course the AK needs rails and a retractable stock, that makes it cooler! And of course we have the Barret, because it's big and makes a loud boom! And of course we have a Glock 18, because it's a Glock! I swear, it's like the IW developers had no idea what real special forces, Rangers, Spetsnaz and Militia would be equipped with, and instead went solely with cool, popular and impractical guns. Black Ops sounds like it's trying to be period correct, or at least have some different guns that other games. Sure there's an anachronistic AUG, but atleast it's not an ACR or Intervention in 1968! Rant complete! Also, I've heard lots of rumours of the Beta being released August 1st, anyone got any info on that? [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

I've heard that rumor too, but as far as I know it has no information to back it up

some guy was selling beta codes on ebay (£12 for a demo!!!) but they have been pulled. unluckey for the 10 people that bought them as the guy was new and had (0)--[[User:Smish34|Smish34]] 22:04, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

They don't really need a high cap 9mm, while it wouldn't be realistic but they could do it like they did in WaW. I remember reading something about a old guy that was killed in his home and over 30 guns stolen and he had a Uzi and a FAL. The guy was in his 70s as I recall and someone said "a uzi and a fal? LOL someone plays to much MW2!" even though the guy most likely never heard of MW2. The FAL used to be fun to look up on Youtube, I discovered it through sportsman guide as a parts kit so I looked it up on youtube and it was just educated comments about the gun. Same video a few months later after MW2 came out it was just gaming nerds that thought they knew guns commenting. I don't want to see this happen to the gun thats in my shoulder holster. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 23:49, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

:COD nerds. Sooner or later they`ll grow out of it(like i did with Counter Strike) [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]

Or not.

Who gives a damn if they do, what are you gonna do, buy a brand new gun, buy the most obscure handgun you can think of? Every profession, field of study, or interest gets its day in the limelight(save for the really boring ones), and videogames are doing this for guns. Do you think that symbologists enjoyed when the Da'Vinci code came out? They were probably just as annoyed as you for all the dilettantes who thought they suddenly knew something about symbology. What the hell are you gonna do? Nothing, I say. --[[User:Mr-Jigsaw|Mr-Jigsaw]] 05:32, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

:I plan on owning guns when I grow up, have already handled and shot many guns, and yet I still plan to play CoD as an adult. You know why? Because I enjoy online gaming, and because oddly IRL you can't shoot people and get away with it (outside of airsoft, which I also play) [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Jigsaw, it appears as though you misread my post, I don't want them to include it because I hate the negative and dumbass attention guns online already attract. I feel as though my sport is tainted because of all these idiots. I'm fine with other games including it that aren't as mainstream but CoD is idiot infested. The 1887 Winchester is a perfect example, I learned about it from terminator 2 and thought it was cool and all and comments on those videos were either people that found out about it the same way and shooters. Now they are filled with nerds talking about it in MW2. Its seriously annoying. Seeing how you people come from video games and not shooting you won't be able to understand. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 20:43, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Well you never addressed the negative attention bit in your original post, but still, how are you going to stop them? Sure it's annoying but it's nothing to stew over. And I like how you assume that we're 'from' gaming and not a shooting history so we obiously can't know how you feel. Also, your page says you're seventeen, I didn't realize that minors could get CCWs, or was that shoulder holster talk figurative, or do you live on a ranch or something?

It was in my own home and it was for real. Don't need a CCW to carry anyway. I never said I'm gonna stop them or make a petition or anything, I was just expressing my point. Yes I did address the negative attention. Alot of you on here in the video game section have more experiance with video games than actual firearms. I know someone that has made it so you he has to approve comments because of the videos of his Beretta M93r.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:18, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

:I'm also extremely proud that even at 16, I came from liking and learning about guns from sources outside of video games. Hell, even if I first see a gun in a game, I'll research it to learn some proper information, not the awesome CoD-Knowledge so many kids think they have nowadays. Literally, I had a kid telling me the ACR was better then the AK-47 the other day because "It's better in MW2, which is really close to real life". I laughed at him for a minute, then went on to own him with a five minute talk on the AK-47, which he promptly retorted to by leaving the game. Cod kids 0, Me 1 [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Eh I shoot when I can, but I mostly just read up on just about everything I can learn about a certain gun once I see it in a movie/game/real life. I wish I had more time to shoot. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 04:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

i hate it when people talk about the intervention sniper as being amazing. ok in real life its very powerful, and i first learnt about it from a film and i thought it looked ugly. i also hate the annoying 10 year olds with the duel shotguns, modern warfare 1 was a great game and tactical, MW2 was more tacticool. especially when you get kids, that shouldnt own the game but are spoilt enbough to get there parents buy it, they lecture you on guns like they have them in their living room and use them constantly. i like the ACR it looks cool, i know it as the 'magpul masdasa' but no one on COD as ever hear of the name. i would like to see pistols as secondary, they balance out the game and dont make it unfair. i would like them to make pistols louder to make them feel powerful rather than a crappy sound that seems quieter than a hole puncher--[[user:smish34|smish34]] 13:44, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

: Well, i always though that ACR looks terrible. First seen it in Future Weapons and only thing that i liked was fact that i can fire both 5.56 and 7.62. Intervention ? This is one of first guns that i heard about first in MW2. I imediattly googled some real life info about it :)

So did I. By the way, is it even called the Masada anymore? I thought Remington bought the rights and renamed it 'Remington ACR'. Oh well, either way I'm still gonna call it the Masada, it sounds better, and MW2 kiddies won't know what I'm talking about. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 16:10, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
:I always thought it was a silly name for a weapon. You ARE aware of what happened to Masada, correct? Yes, it's a great example of defiance in the face of incredible odds, but the fact remains, everyone eventually killed themselves. (Or each other, but you know what I mean.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:38, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

It was designed by Magpul under the Masada name and then Bushmaster started building them. Then came Freedom group that bought Remington and they decided to buy bushmaster. So now the bushmaster ACR has the remington name on it even though they have nothing to do with design or manufacturing.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 16:42, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see. And I had no idea that happened to Masada, I'll have to look into that. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 17:49, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

:Well, from what I've heard as a heavy rumor from many places, tomorrow could be the release of the Black Ops Public Beta. It seems logical, as it gives roughly two and a bit months of Beta before it's closed so Treyarch can finish the game off for the November release, but then again maybe not. All I can say is, fingers crossed, because tomorrow we could be going deep and going hard men![[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:: Tommorrow? Now I seriously doubt that. I don't think they can just drop a public beta on us like that without an official announcement. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:27, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

:::It's happened before, and if not released tomorrow, maybe they announce it tomorrow then release for Monday. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

well they havent confirmed nor denied the beta but some hackers found the codes a few months ago, they also found the halo reach beta codes months before it was announced. but i think they would give some indication on wether or not they are, also there was this guy selling codes on ebay a few days ago, definatly fake, and they have been pulled [[user:smish34|smish34]]

While i'm not fully aware of the differences between the ACR and the Masada, but the most notable is the location of the charging handle. The Masada has it over the ejection port while the ACR has it over the forend. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 20:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Correct me if i'm wrong, but I heard on youtube I heard that it was originaly call the magpul masada, but they changed the name because they didn't want the name masada on there gun so they changed it to the name acr. Liek I said if I'm way of correct me.

==Anyone Take Notice?==

During one of the gameplay videos, did anyone take notice to the AK-47 icon (where it said "Hold X For AK-47)? It looks a bit colored instead of grey (meaning i noticed some orange in it as well) [[SeanWolf]]

Those Icons are only grey, no color. It had to be behind it giving it the appearance of orange.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 22:27, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Well...i was looking at this image and it LOOKS colored (the stock)[[User:SeanWolf]]:

[[Image:CODBO-AK47blip.jpg]]

: That looks coloured to me too. Hmm, that's interesting. And it's not like it's all one color, like something could be behind it giving it the illusion of colour, the reciever seems to be some kind of a metallic blue while the wooden handguard and stock seem to be orange-ish. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 02:12, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah it is, Thats what I get for not looking at it. Thought it would have been the same as before. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 03:17, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

== New Trailer ==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_fsM6LBi54

Straight off the bat, there's a FAMAS, Ballistic Knife, and what some people on the CoD wiki have claimed to to be an Arctic Warfare type sniper rifle. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 15:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
:...and an exploding RC car. Interesting...--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 18:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
::''Holy hell...they've stopped trying. Depending on how any demo and reviews are, I might just buy it for the single player, but the multiplayer is completely out of the question. They took Modern Warfare 2 - which wasn't the best of bases to start with - and made it worse. Just like Treyarch, I suppose.'' --[[User:Clutch|Clutch]] 18:14, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

: It looked a lot better than MW2 to me. A lot of the minor details looked the same, like the kill medals at the top of the screen, but other than that not much looked the same. And I do believe that was an Arctic Warfare, but I'll have to look a little closer before I'm sure. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 18:30, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

: Watched it again: Yes, that is an Arctic Warfare. And another thing to note, the FAMAS was missing it's carry handle! Again, Treyarch? Really? [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 19:14, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

:There IS a FAMAS without the carrying handle, but it's a DMR and the carrying handle is removed solely to mount a scope on it [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 19:39, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

::kind of like this.--[[User:Smish34|Smish34]] 19:58, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
[[image:Famascoddmr.jpg|thumb|none|400px]]

:The one in the game is EXACTLY like this thing. Even though it's a FAMAS again, it does look kinda cool despite the fact that this gun never existed during the Cold War...this is stupid. They got an AR-15 that shouldn't exist, an Accuracy International Arctic Warfare that shouldn't be in the game, the AUG, which might not exist in the game either, and now a FAMAS that shouldn't exist. They going to pull anything else out of their asses? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 20:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

::Unless they've gone down the "we don't care that it's not historically accurate, we're trying to make it fun" route. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 20:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
:::Mind you, all of this is from multiplayer. It's multiplayer, there's no story, no setting. Why can't they use anything they want? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

:::: You do know this places THROUGH OUT the cold war. This is also a MULTIPLAYER trailer, so a number of weapons that appear through out the game can appear. Now, I'm not defending this game, I don't even play CoD anymore. But I'm just saying the fact's about the game. I mean...Yes, if the Accuracy International Arcticle Warfare appeared in single player in a Vietnam mission, then yes, "What the hell..." But this is a multiplayer teaser. (Just to say the Accuracy International Article Warfare started producing in 1982 which the Cold War was still up and running) Please don't rant at me, as I'm just giving the fact's about the game. [[User:Hoot471|Hoot471]] 20:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

::::::Ok, if a gun appears in the MILTIPLAYER, then it most likely will appear in the game. I have yet to see a shooter game that has guns that appear in the multiplayer mode NOT appear in single player. I've seen the reverse, like in MW2, the SVD appears in singleplayer, but not multi. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:36, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

And to ADD to that, yes we know this game takes place THROUGHOUT the cold war, which was official between the end of WWII and 1989 ish. The FAMAS wasn't even in production until 1995. The AUG might be excused but the year the mission took place when it made an appearances is 68 and the weapon wasn't even patented until 77. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:40, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Could someone edit the Famas section?It says that it appeared in multiplayer foor

The creators said that the guns that they have are prototypes so some of them will be used when not in service.
:Well the creators are bullshitters. You're telling me the French created the FAMAS carrying handleLESS prototype almost 20 YEARS before it was put into service? And the G2 rail version even which was made in 2001? I might forgive the AUG somewhat, but there is so much bullshit I can take here. There are so many other weapons Treyarch could use, but they had to try to somehow bullshit the weapons from MW2 into this game instead of being original. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:47, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I agree that Treyarch could have picked another gun, but if you think about it all the recent call of duty game (Modern Warfare, Modern Warfare 2) not all the guns that are used in the game would be used at that time, but they are little thing like the w1200 wouldn't be used in 2011 and the wa2000 in 2016 so maybe the famas and the ar 15 are the acceptions.

MW2 is a different kind of weapon selection. It takes place in an unspecified "near future" kind of storyline or present day. All the weapons in the game exist in the current timeframe. MW2 isn't a period piece game, COD from 1 to 3 were all WWII games and Modern Wafare is well, as the title goes, "Modern Warfare." Black Ops takes place within the Cold War, a time before 1989, so any guns before than is acceptable. Sure, seeing a gun that won't be out in the open market for another 2-3 years, yeah I can accept that. A lot of prototype weapons are like that, but the FAMAS is in a game that is more than a decade before the concept inception of said weapon. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 23:11, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

It's a bit more than a decade. The game's set in 1967/68, so a good thirty-odd years before it was conceived. The problem is, they could have inserted the real FAMAS prototype, no problem (1971, compared with 1974 for the AUG). [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 23:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I heard that treyarch isn't going past the 1980 mark.

Ok I agree with maybe Treyarch just abused the prototype thing, but they can always take the famas out, they look at the forums.
:I don't think they do [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 23:24, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

On the new multiplayer video did anyone see the guy roll out the way around the :36 mark? - the marksman.
:Looks like he jumped and slide away from the gunfire. I hope we get to do that. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

: We can. If everything else from that old Multiplayer rumor is also true, which is a very real possibillity as a lot of it was confirmed or all but confirmed in that trailer, it will be a standard mechanic and won't need any kind of a perk or anything. Also, I've just gone ahead and decided to completly disregard this game realism. It's obviously trying to be some sort of "Modern Warfare back in time" deal, so at this point I'm just hoping it's fun. And that's all that will really matter in the end, right? [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 03:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
::No, I can't accept that! Call of Duty originated as a game that takes place in a set time frame and immerses you in it with historical accuracies. Every game except for MW2 has been very accurate, especially when compared to other video games. If they wanted all these modern guns, then why make the time frame set in Vietnam/the Cold War? Why all of a sudden do they only care about making it look cool instead of providing us with realism like they always have? With the FAMAS G2 FELIN and the Accuracy International Rifle, they are officially bullshitting about the fact that these are prototypes in the Vietnam War. There can be no more arguments against that fact. But why do they have to do that to what was once such a legitimate series?
:::Look around on this page, and we go into why they chose the time period they did. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

: Money. Most consumers don't care or even know that most of these guns weren't around in the game's time period, they don't even really care about the Singleplayer, they just want cool guns in their Multiplayer. Of course I don't agree with this at all. 02:50, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
::That still doesn't make sense to me. Call of Duty got its very successful start making realistic games. When it came out Call of Duty 4 was one of the best selling games ever and it's one of the most legitimate modern war games I've ever seen. Based on that you would think that people like seeing an accurate game.
:::First off, a game where you can single-handed kill half the German army is not that realistic. In fact, I personally think it's a bit insulting to the real veterans who only had one life and no continues to play with. Second, MW2 wasn't realistic and it still sold a bajillion copies. Yes, it's about the money. Don't like it? Then don't spend your gaming dollar on it. Our wallets are our votes. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:00, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
::::Obviously being able to kill a million people isn't realistic. Perhaps a better word would be accurate. You can tell in the first 5 Call of Dutys they made a good effort to get their shit right. Now they don't even try. I don't understand why they stopped trying with MW2 and now why Treyarch is following suit. I wouldn't buy any of these games but there's no more realistic or accurate games coming out anymore and I can only play the old Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon games so much before I get tired of them.

I'd like to make a small correction, the FAMAS was designed from 1967-1971 and the first generation FAMAS's entered service in 1978. Dose this mean you'd see a G2 in the Vietnam war, no but a prototype without a carry handle could hypothetically have exited in the time of the game.

=== I think this is actual FAMAS Prototype ===

Isn it ? Whatever. It will be awesome if actual prototypes of guns will get in.
[[image:FAMAS_PROTOTYPE.JPG|thumb|none|400px]]

If it is than they won't put it in, doesn't look as cool you know, thats what counts.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Pepole please acquant yourself with the FAMAS's history here. Thank you. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAMAS]

== The COD wiki ==

I just looked over at the COD wiki and it is a nightmare over there on their format and what little info they put on their pages and disregard the "gun nerds" on any contributions. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

That's because there's a policy against adding IRL info to the weapon articles. Although I've just been having an argument with someone who was convinced the FAMAS here was an F1. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 22:52, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Have they ever seen the F1 FAMAS, it has the carrying handle. Only the FAMAS G2 had the option of getting no carrying handle. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:53, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

His initial argument was that it couldn't be a G2 because it had a small trigger guard and was using the proprietary magazine, rather than the large hand-guard and a STANAG magazine (despite the G2 being able to fit+feed both). [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 22:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
:Then this FAMAS don't exist either in the real world like the Ar-15. The developers are also looking at "Black Ops" history wrong. The concept of today's special forces were really different back then during the Cold War. It's not the same kind of people or style as it hasn't been refined like today Spec Ops. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 23:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm over at Cod wiki right now.

==Those are definitely explosive tips==

The attachment on this picture:
http://www.imfdb.org/images/7/77/Codblackopsunkownattachment.jpg
is definitely explosive tip for crossbow.
just watch the trailer and stop at 0:30 and look in the killfeed.
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/804/callofdutyblackopsmulti.png

==A nice detail==
Look at 0:09 in the new trailer, there is clan tag written on the AR-15 charging handle.

Yeah, I noticed that. I like that little touch. But I hope it doesn't just copy his clan tag from next to his name and paste it on the charging handle, I hope I can have something written on my gun without having to have a clan tag. I don't particularly like clan tags, mostly because I hate clans. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 02:55, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

==Ballistic knife==
would the Ballistic knife be listed as a firearm or not?

Maybe it does shoot a projectile even thought it is not a firearm.

No because its not a firearm.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 00:43, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

To be fair though, the crossbow isn't a fire arm, but it is a ballistic weapon. And isn't the Punisher's compound bow up even though THAT isn't a firearm? Just put up the ballistic knife.--[[User:True Night]]

I have a better idea: Since they aren't firearms, let's remove the crossbow from this page and the compound bow from the ''Punisher'' page. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 08:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

== Snub Nose ==

I went over to cod wiki and there is a page about a snub nose attachment for the colt python
Confirm?

I swear I saw snub nose in the new Multi-player trailer. Maybe faster draw?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Went back to the video and I saw it, the guy is switching to it. http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/319/snubnose.png[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:20, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...Snubnosed=less accuracy+shorter range= more XP per kill? [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 01:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Probably the same logic that it somehow gets more damage with a shorter barrel like the double barrel shotgun in WaW. I'm leaning more towards a faster draw.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:36, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Apparently, it leads to more accuracy and less damage. Hmm [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 02:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

== Anachronisms ==

Can we please not say that the guns are anachroistic on the actual page? Because Me, along with alot of other people, agree that we really don't care about anachrosisms so please can we just limit comment about anarchistic guns to th talk page please? Thank you. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 20:54, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

:Then what's the point of a discussion page if we can't DISCUSS about shit? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:34, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Also, since this ISN'T the Call of Duty Wiki, where it is full of people who can't accept REAL facts, I am undoing all the erasing of pointing out that the guns are anachronistic. Cause that's how I roll [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
:I'm one of those people who don't think it'll affect the quality of the game, but I do believe it should be pointed out. I also believe we'll be able to make a better judgement call on whether or not these are truly anachronistic or just victims of an alternative timeline once the game actually comes out. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 22:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

:Drjuki, the whole point of this whole site is the guns and this page is to discuss the ones in the game. And like Excalibur said, this isn't the Call of Duty Wiki where factual real world information about said guns is against the rules. So, yes, we ''are'' going to point out anachronisms. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:13, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

:: Although I do think it should be noted on the page when a certain firearm is anachronistic, I also think it should be simply noted, not ridiculed. Not sure if there really is any on this page, actually haven't looked at it in a while, but it's been a problem on other pages, with commments such as "Aparently they did no research" and such. Our job here is to jot down the facts, not intermingle them with our own thoughts. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 03:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
:::Well that's just it, we don't have the facts. We have images, and no context. Why not just wait until the game actually comes out? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
The context of the trailers and images is that the game takes place during the Cold War period and we have a gun like that AR-15 carbine. No forward assist or brass deflector and the weird magazine. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
:The context of a three minute trailer, or multiple three minute trailers that tell us nothing? I'm fairly certain I've seen all the trailers, and yet I can't tell you what the overall goal of the campaign is. What are we fighting for? To prevent nuclear war? Assassinate rogue agents? Who's the villain? Is there one? It can all be a dream, or a fevered hallucination for all we know. And it wouldn't surprise me at all if the plot was paper thin. It's MP that sells the game. The only reason why there's a campaign at all is because they can't sell the game for full price if it's only MP. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
::We can ridicule anachronisms if we want, it's a discussion page where we can say what we want. And yeah they didn't do their research or worse straight up ignored the fact these guns didn't exist back then. I think more of us would agree that Treyarch failed on the firearms.
::: Seriously. Only firearms ?
I wasn't talking about the discussion page, I was talking about the main page. Say whatever you want here. [[Special:Contributions/67.187.27.89|67.187.27.89]] 15:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
:No one was really talking in the main page. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

::Well good, let's keep it that way. It's been a problem on other pages, with ''much'' less incorrect details than this game, so I was just trying to keep it clean here. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 15:35, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

--[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 12:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)Im sorry but if you are going to put a gun that wasn't even in development until 2001 in a game set pre 1989 then you may asweel put an ipod in too. It's just silly, those guns were made with materials and machinery that didn't even exsist. I'm personally hoping that there is a surprise mission that takes place in a more modern setting.--[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 12:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

== Watch the ending of the Campaign reveal that.... ==

The SOG soldiers are back in time to prevent a nuclear war, and they brought all their guns and equipment from the future with them. That would just make my day, would be so awful it's hilarious. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 16:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
:Honestly, I'll cry if that happens. In the metaphorical sense, of course. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 22:46, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

== Dragunov? ==

In the new Prestige Trailer [[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4HreDGcQus]], people have speculated that the rifle the sniper is carrying at the end is a Dragonuv. Anyone concur?

watch ust before he blows up, the stock and the positioning are from the draganuv --[[User:Smish34|Smish34]] 20:02, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Its a dragonuv. Also I noticed the Dragonuv style scope in the very begining. Do we finally get different redicles for the different rifles?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:17, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I think the action diver had one, too

== R/C car ==

For Modern warfare 2 it was the nvgs and now we have a R/C car with a camera and a microphone. what are your thoughts on this?

Dumb crap makes my wallet giggle... --[[Special:Contributions/99.65.211.227|99.65.211.227]] 09:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Retarded gimmick is retarded.

== Some prototypes photos ==

So... When Treyarch decides to put prototype guns, why not choose actual prototypes ?

For exmaple '''prototype Famas'''.[http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Talk:Call_of_Duty:_Black_Ops#I_think_this_is_actual_FAMAS_Prototype]

Post more prototype photos. I wish to see ''AUG, SPAS'' or ''AWM'' prototype.

And i have one question - May be Stg. RH-70 some kind of AUG Prototype ?
[[image:2757881.jpg|thumb|none|400px]]

I just looked it up, its not a AUG Prototype, its a gun that was meant to be a 5.56 x 45 rifle to replace the G3 as the service arm but its not a AUG prototype.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

The way things are nowadays if it doesn't look cool its not gonna be in the game. Wouldn't surprise me if the G11 is covered by rails.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:42, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
:Probably. It also bothers me that in WaW and CoD4 they actually tested and recorded most of the weapons. We all know there is no way they got their hands on a G11 to test it or record sounds from it.

Probably gonna take sounds from another gun. IMO though that gun is UGLY! --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
:Who would know what a G11 sounds like? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 19:22, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

There is a youtube video which i'll post here for you guys of it, probably already infested with CoD nerds posting dumbass things and arguing about MW2.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:45, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6JWCEmCgD8--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:47, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Huh, so that's what caseless ammo looks like. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 01:11, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The SPAS 12 prototype: (note the shorter barrel and different folding stock): [http://spas12.com/spas/franchimod12a.jpg]
The AUG prototype (with many differences from the final product): [http://world.guns.ru/assault/aug_pr1.gif]----[[User:Markit|Markit]] 03:13, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Looks just like the shorter model, combat model I think. I forgot.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 03:56, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Never mind that gun is pretty much the AUG prototype. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:04, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

If the AUG in the game looks like the prototype, I can ignore it, but it looks like the modern variant [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:14, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

==RPG-7==
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100812011017/callofduty/images/9/93/RPG7BO.png

Can someone put that pic on the page in "RPG-7" section? I got this image from here: http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/RPG-7

==Time period and Guns==

There is a lot of stuff on this page so I don't know if this has been said or not, but this game takes place in different time periods so that's probably why there is such an array of anachronistic weapons. [[User:humanzie3|humanzie3]]

Finally someone said it. The developers said the game takes place in the '''COLD WAR''' not just Vietnam. Everyone keeps complaining about this gun and that gun being anachronistic to 1968 but it looks like a decent amount of this game will take place after that time. I've heard talk as late as the 80's so wouldn't that then make the AUG, SPAS, and FAMAS technically time period correct? --[[User:Subiefan98|Subiefan98]] 17:35, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

:That point has been made before, and it becomes moot when a SPAS-12 (developed in the mid 1970s) turns up in the middle of the Tet Offensive in 1968, or likewise when an unchanged AUG A1 rifle appears in the late 1960s when it wasn't even patented until 1974. The "but black ops are so awesome they get secret prototype weapons!" argument would have made more sense if the weapons in question actually existed in the years that specific levels take place in. What the developers are doing is tantamount to giving you an AK-47 in 1943 and telling you that its presence is historically accurate because it was designed in the same era. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 19:27, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

: Even if the game would take place in 1989 ( ''And i guess it wont'' ) FAMAS FELIN will be still anachronistic.

== The Best Thing About Black Ops..... ==

.. '''None of that goddamned overpowered burst-fire weapons!!!!!!'''
Now, before you all fly off the handle at me. I just want to say a few things. 1- I am not a member of this site, but I visit it every time I want to identfy a gun used in a movie. 2- I do have real-life gun knowledge, unlike the fools who play Call of Duty and suddenly assume they're gun experts.
I do realize that many people find 3-round bursts useful in real-life. I see it as unecessary and useless. I'm also going to add that I am a Call of Duty player and I know for a fact that they intentionally make the burst-fire weapons overpowered, which is why I am so glad that it won't be featured in Black Ops.
:While I can agree with you that the kids who think that playing CoD automatically qualifies them as firearm experts are annoying (I've actually had a kid try to tell me that the AUG, the normal one, is a machine gun and not an assault rifle), and while I can also agree that I don't prefer burst fire weapons to automatic ones in real life, I have to disagree on your main point. The three shot burst weapons in Modern Warfare 2 are not overpowered. How many shots, without stopping power, does it take to kill with the M16A4 or the Famas? One burst, or three bullets, though on extremely rare occasions, it takes four bullets. How many shots does it take, again without stopping power, to kill with a SCAR-H, or a TAR-21? Again, three. So no, the burst weapons aren't over powered. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 20:49, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

: That doesn't neccessarily mean it's balanced. It also has a ''much'' higher rate of fire, even ''less'' recoil, if that's even possible, and a farther range, if I remember correctly. Now the M16A4 in MW2 was pretty balanced, but really only because it had a bit of spread with it's shots. The FAMAS, however, was the most unbalanced piece of work in gaming history. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 00:42, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
::Which is really strange to me, since I was much better with the M16 then I was with the FAMAS. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 08:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually they may have the M16 be some sort of burst fire prototype, after all they got the cool stuff before it exsisted and produced so they just might.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 03:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Well in Metal Gear Solid 3, they got away with having an XM16E1 with a 4 selector capability [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

== New pics ==

IGN has some new BO pics:

[http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14349501/call-of-duty-black-ops/images/call-of-duty-black-ops-20100818054555152.html?page=mediaFull]

Theeeere's that forward grip on the AUG.

[http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14349501/call-of-duty-black-ops/images/call-of-duty-black-ops-20100818054602839.html?page=mediaFull]

Okay, the AK mag IS a little off. And the holster looks like the holster for a Walther P38/P1. Any ideas on that shotgun (?) on his back? Or is it an M79?
:AK has a proper 545 plastic clip with little ribs on the side. But I would more like to see AKS74 in game...
::Magazine is the proper term.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 03:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Shotgun is probably china lake laucher.
: Yes, it is. '''Russians with China Lake GL'''? Yeah, thats even more stupid, anachronistic and epic failing than Russians with SPAS.
::dude...thats the KS-23 shotgun. [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]
::What makes you think he's Russian? And even if he is, it could be multiplayer for all we know. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
::: He has SP´s russian model. And i think its SP mission - Because all other "new" screens are from SP :)
[http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14349501/call-of-duty-black-ops/images/call-of-duty-black-ops-20100818054551731.html?page=mediaFull]
::::What about the Russians running around with FALs in MW2? or TAR 21s?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 20:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
::::: Yeah. It was really stupid too...
Inception had the MW2 dream, so you know people are going to call this the "Inception level."

[http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14349501/call-of-duty-treyarch-project/images/call-of-duty-black-ops-20100818054558715.html]

A) This doesn't really look like a new picture, and B) it looks like he's using 20 round mags, but with 30 round ammo pouches. (Epic fail. WTF?! I'm going to cancel my preorder this instant!)

--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 21:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

== I think they did it again... ==
With the fictional flattop ARs, I mean. A screenshot of Frank Woods on the Call of Duty Wiki looks like the M16 he's holding has a flattop just like the AR Carbine. Take a look for yourself [http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100730204211/callofduty/images/6/6b/M16A1.jpg]. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 08:53, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

It does look like the carry handle is missing. Wouldn't surprise me if this M16 is also burst fire.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:27, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
: You are wrong. It will have burst fire ( well, you are right in that ) but it will have RIS Rails all over the place. NV Scope and lasers.... sure.

I can believe it if it has the early night optics that are as large as a professional camera. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:41, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

:Eww.. Its Treyarch. Those optics will be even smaller than they are in our days.
::Oh right, they'd just take something that DID exist and turn it into something stupid for its time and say black ops can do it [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:27, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

==Galil and KS-23 confirmed at Gamescom 2010==
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Galil & http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/KS-23 [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]
: + Makarov. But get some proper screenshots first. Those from cod wiki are terrible quality.
::Couldn`t find anything better. Well see more in the upcoming days. [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]
:::I'm impressed. I don't think I've ever seen either in a game before. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 14:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
::::KS-23 maybe, but the Galil was Counter Strike. [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKtnJkjxhog Crap quality! I know, but that was the only way he could smuggle the footage. Makarov pistol around 9:50, KS-23 near end. [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]

:Makarov! :D, Then again we are gonna get a crapload of new Makarov "experts"--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 15:12, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
::I counter them with my Hi-Power! [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]
:::No! Then there will be Hi Power "experts"! Not my favorite handgun!--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 02:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I wonder if they classify KS-23 as shotgun or rifle/ carbine.
:Given the capacity (four rounds) and the fact a lot of the available rounds appear to be grenades, maybe a grenade launcher, a Russian equivalent to the China Lake launcher. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 14:48, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
::The guys at Treyarch must have heard your rants about "Spetsnaz didn`t use the SPAS" and the put the KS in. [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]
:KS is yet another anachronism.
:: I think at this point that's a given. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 16:58, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
:OMG GUYS STOP IT! If you point out any more of them we`ll be walking into a soviet base with nothing more then knives and pointy sticks, forced to do roundhouse kicks every 10 seconds to conserve ammo! Treyarch means serious biznis! [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]

"Black Ops is said to be set in various locations, including Vietnam and Cuba, [3] and judging from weaponry and dates given in the trailer, it is set between 1960 and 2010."
I must paste it once again...[(BTW in CoD4 we had that Pripyat mission in 1995, so I guess Treyarch made another "American/English commandos in Russia after Cold War" mission)(Sorry for my crappy English)]
: It seems like you are trying to protect Treyarch´s weapons choice, right ? But dont forget that both already seen missions took place in 1968. And they had SPAS-12 and AUG......

I find it hard to believe when they say that this game will take place during the Cold War and now you say there will be a mission taking place in present day? How did you come across that information? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Info is from CoD wikia, but yeah, I forgot that in leaked video those guys had "CCCP" written on their backs, so the mission takes place before 1990s. Sorry for mistake.
: And what is even better. It has been confirmed that WMD mission takes place in 1968.

== AI Arctic Warfare ==

Man, That sucks! IW now decides to put in the awesome AI Arctic Warfare and now it doesn't even fit because it's very anachronistic in this game (as is the Walther WA 2000 and other weapons). Why was it not in the MW series? It would of fit perfectly in the first MW, it would of made more sense in the mission All Ghilled Up than the M14s because )1 it's British )2 it was available at that time (1995 right?). And it would have been far better than stupid Remington 700 in MP, I mean come on, the Remington 700 IS the M40A3! They just decided to make the scope wobble more and gave it the same damage as the .50 cal Barrett M82A1 WTH! MW2's main menu art even has a sniper with AI AW (and also a soldier with a SCAR-L) but it's not even in the game. Well, at least they put the CheyTac M200 Intervention in the game.

You seem to have overlooked the fact that this isn't an Infinity Ward game, it's being developed by Treyarch, who have no affiliation with IW. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 20:30, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
:Well, they do share the same parent company, Activision. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
:Even so, I doubt Treyarch would have any say in what weapon IW would put into their game, or vice versa. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 20:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
::OK, Then I meant Treyarch/IW. By the way, did Treyarch make both MW games? I'm just making sure.
:::Treyarch had nothing to do with Modern Warfare, IW made both. Treyarch did COD5. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 10:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
::::Alright thanks for clearing that up. I'm just saying it would have made more sense if IW had the AW in the MW games. As I said, it would have fit well both sense wise and realism wise.
::: "The Accuracy International Arctic Warfare rifle is a family of bolt-action sniper rifles designed and manufactured by the British company Accuracy International. It has proved popular as a civilian, police and military rifle since its introduction in the '''1980s'''." If you want the real date, it's actually 1982 when the L96A1 came into British Military service. Oh, and the Walther WA 2000 was desgined in the 1970s - 1980s and first produced in the same year as the L96A1 came into service, 1982. [[User:Hoot471|Hoot471]] 08:35, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
::::Thank you. Didn't the mission All Ghilled Up take place in 1995? That's why I think the AW/L96 would have fit better in MW because your playing as British snipers, Price and the other guy (sorry, can't remember his name). As for the WA2000, what the hell is it doing in MW2?! it's not a Military rifle! (guess it's in there cus they thought in looked cool *sigh*). And in BlackOps, both the AW and WA2000 are highly anachronistic.

:Seriously, why can't Treyarch pick weapons that have NOT been in the previous game? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 13:35, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
::I think they're trying to compromise, including familiar favorites like the SPAS and the FAMAS and putting in more obscure (at least by gaming standards) weapons like the Galil and the KS-23. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 14:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
:::Who the hell is using the Israelite Galil in the this game?! I hope not the Russians.
::::They just needed to have a jew gun in the game instead of TAR.
:::::Oh course, it's that vast international Jewish video game weapon conspiracy. How could we forget? (Jew gun? What are you, a hillbilly?) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
::::::Don't forget that most of those "Jew guns" could rip you apart, or are you forgetting the Uzi family, Desert Eagle, Jericho, and Tavors? Not to mention what they can do in the hands of Mossad. Don't make the mistake of underestimating Israel, it'll likely be the last mistake you ever make.:D -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 00:21, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
::::::::I don't see nothing good about those "kosher" weapons. All of them are inferior compared to western (and even russian) designs.
:::::::Great the WA2000 again, That thing is ugly, rare, and definatly not a combat rifle. IW was playing too many hitman games when they thought of that. Treyarch copying it is just really stupid.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 03:24, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
::::::::You gotta admit, Israels got some great weapons; this coming from a guy who loves German and Russian weapons, and also good ol' Browning's designs. :D Oh, and the big reason the WA2000 is not used in the Military is the same reason the awesome HK PSG1 is not used: it's too heavy and delicate for Military use.
:::::::::The WA2000 is a expensive and rare gun. I believe that 200 something of them were made. There are many better guns in all aspects than the WA2000. Its not just that its too delicate, its expensive, bulky, and rare. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:03, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Name a few?
Somebody needs to stop learning everything they know from movies and games. Open your eyes, or maybe you should just go back to your Klan rally. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 20:24, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
:My facts about guns are only based on REAL LIFE information, never games or movies. (by the guy who started the AW discussion)

::Should make an account and sign your posts, easier that way.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:39, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

You should also get me some "real life" statistics that PROVE beyond a doubt that Israeli designs are "inferior." -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 14:22, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
:Are you a hater like that guy who hates the Beretta 92? Oh and thanks FIVETWOSEVEN, I will consider making a account. :)
::Not at all, I happen to love the Beretta 92, I think it's one of the best handguns ever made. I just don't like when people make biased statements like that without giving a reason to back it up. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 00:44, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
:::I was talking about a guy on the Beretta 92 discussion page that hates the 92 for no real reason. and what IS wrong with the Uzi, Jericho, and the Tavor? What "facts" do you have that make these weapons "inferior"? Do you hate Israel or something? (note, I am not trying to rude, a jerk, or a wise-ass) The Uzi is more or less the SMG equivalent of the AK, it is simple, reliable, and cheap like the AK, the Jericho is, from what I heard, is a very good all-steel handgun, and the Tavor is a great step forward for Israel's assault weapon technologies. If I'm wrong, please tell me and prove it with real facts.
::::Correct me if I'm wrong, but you may have misread something, cuz it seems like that post was directed at me. I agree 100% with every point you just made there. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 18:07, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
:::::I honestly think you two have gotten confused and started arguing with each other when you both support the same position. This is why it would be much easier if everyone had an account. As to my opinion on the topic, I love Israeli made weapons. You're right about the Uzi family. It's extremely rugged, though not terribly accurate (But you can always do worse). As to the Tavor and the Jericho? I've only fired the Jericho once, but it handled great, though I still prefer the 92FS to it. And the Tavor, I love the Tavor. Honestly, if I was going into combat and I was given the choice, I'd take the TAR-21 over an M4A1 any day. I mean, the M4A1 is a great gun, but I just have a thing for bullpups. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 01:43, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
::::::I'm really sorry about that, my mistake, I thought you were the same guy who said "I don't see nothing good about those "kosher" weapons. All of them are inferior compared to western (and even russian) designs."

Nah, I think he ran away under our combined onslaught. xD Anywho, if it isn't signed as K, it isn't me. :) -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 14:42, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

== SKS ==
:Hopefully there will be an SKS in game because with the part of the game taking place in Vietnam, it would make sense to see it in the hands of the Viet Cong.--[[User:Mpe2010|Mpe2010]] 21:17, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
::'''It would make sense.''' This is only and biggest reason why they wont put it in.
::As much as I agree with you, I wouldn't get my hopes up. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
:::Even if they include it, would anyone use it? It doesn't do anything better than any other weapon you can get in the game. As much as I like the SKS in real life, I wouldn't use one if I had an AK or an AR-15 available. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 22:16, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Oh you silly people, even if they included an SKS they'd bastardize it with enough railmounts to drive a train on, and then make it have an attachable grenade launcher/katana/lasersight/ammo dispenser. :) -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 00:34, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
:Well. It would be RAIL with SKS attached.
: I never really had my hopes up.--[[User:Mpe2010|Mpe2010]] 22:06, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
::If they have the correct grenade launcher on it, probably will work just like it did in WaW. Firing a round through the grenade.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 00:58, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
:Actually, only the yugoslavian version of the SKS had the grenade launcher. Not the Russian or Chinese version that would appear in game if it is put in.--[[User:Mpe2010|Mpe2010]] 01:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh I was wrong then, never have payed too much attention to the SKS, also doesn't help that the most common seems to be a Yugo.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 03:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
: Its Romanian WASR there. So why not yugoslavian SKS ? Oh, and i think they will put it there with M203 or GP-25 on it.
::Tats not WASR but just a retarded AK-74
::: Well, i think they just googled "AK" and modelled first gun they have seen.
::::Or some crappy airsoft gun. I can't wait till a game is made where EVERY ASPECT of firearms is 100% CORRECT and not tacticool.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:05, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
:::::Blame the internet then, not the 3d artists or the company. It's hard enough to find a high enough resolution orthographic picture of the gun you want to model. Sometimes you have to make do with a similar model. 3d artists just can't model a gun out of thin air, you need references to use as a backdrop during modeling, and let's face it, the artist is going to use the high res sideview of an AK-74 over a low res slightly off sideview of a genuine AK-47. As for airsoft, take note that airsoft companies often provide a perfectly aligned sideview of their guns, which works great for modeling. I'd take a 1000x700 picture of an airsoft M4 over a 400x300 picture of the genuine gun. And if you were a 3d modeler, you would too.--[[User:Mr-Jigsaw|Mr-Jigsaw]] 02:30, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
::omgz they could check this site. Or... photograph a real deal when they were recording gun sounds. And if they for some f-ing reason left off muzzle break from AK74 that would be a fail
:::Or maybe get a real gun, don't even have to guy one, just rent or borrow one from someone that owns one. That isn't so hard is it? They did that with Lord of War with about 3,000 CZ rifles.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 14:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
::::Lord of War was a feature film, starring Nicholas Cage. I'm sure they had a lot more money than the average game does. Why pay extra money on something that isn't integral to the quality or enjoyment of a game? Besides, airsoft guns are relatively cheap, and a number of companies sell full metal near exact(and exact in some cases) copies of the real weapons. But ultimately, if you can't look beyond an Mp5's lack of a paddle release, you are playing games for all the wrong reasons. And really, no muzzle brake is fail? Seriously, learn to live with it. Also, most of the pictures on this site are too small for modeling accurately off of. Some are large enough, but most aren't. And not all games record real guns in person for their sounds, and some that do simply use similar models or completely different guns.--[[User:Mr-Jigsaw|Mr-Jigsaw]] 21:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
:::::You do realize that this game is gonna rake in millions. They can't rent or buy a $400 AK 47?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:08, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
::::::This is not exclusive to this game. You said you wanted to see ''any'' game that got everything right. Also, Treyarch is based in Santa Monica, ''California''. If you knew anything about Californian gun laws, you would realize how difficult it would be for them to get their hands on a genuine Ak47. Besides, the 3d artists don't really get to decide how all the company's money is spent. And I doubt a higher up would care enough(for somewhat good reason) to waste a thousand bucks on a post-ban Kalashnikov that is not the correct model anyway.

:::::::Once again, they could either rent or borrow one. Doesn't even have to be an actual Russian AK 47. It would be fine if it was a Yugo, Bulgarian or whatever, they are similar enough to not be a problem. The point is going alittle further and not basing the model off a crappy airsoft gun or the wrong picture.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:10, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

:The always present problem with game designers is that they forget the extreme details on a gun and when they do CGI modeling, they always make mistakes and forget somethings. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:26, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
::I think you missed a word.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:11, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
== AS VAL ==
: I think it would be cool if they put the AS VAL in as a weapon of the Soviet Forces
::No.

== AKS-74U? ==

Where in Sam Hill did you guys get that from? I never saw anyone holding one in the Teaser. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:23, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

It's on that wall of guns in the insight video, and theres apparently a pic at Call of Duty Wiki with someone holding it from the teaser. If you ask me, its still not 100% confirming it --[[User:FirearmsNewbie|FirearmsNewbie]] 02:19, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

This is the image they're saying is an AKS-74U [http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/File:AK-74uBO.png]. Not very convincing, if you ask me, but I wouldn't put it past Treyarch as they've already failed epically by the looks of things so far. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:27, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Definatly is a short AK something.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:05, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
:Yeah, it looks like a short AK, but we can't be sure exactly what it is. Hell, it could be a full length AK at a weird camera angle. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 01:47, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

There are so many AK variants out there they can pull out of their asses, why another AK-74U? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:15, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Because I doubt they know any others and they don't want to confuse players.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:53, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

== New details released ==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kg_8mPoloBo

This confirms a whole bunch of stuff, too much for me to list. [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 02:10 2 September 2010 (UTC)

: Almighty, there's a mini-gun....a ''handheld'' minigun...
::Wow! I'm so pumped for spaying batches of n000bs with that thing WOW

:: Who cares?! An Ithica! And an L96! I'm in love. [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 02:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
:::I just watched the video...HOLY CRAP...A MINIGUN?!...Im in heaven! [[User:SeanWolf]]
:: [[Predator#GE_M134_Minigun_Handheld|"Payback Time!"]] [[User:Swamples|Swamples]] 03:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
:::New weapons we see are the WA2000, Makarov, Ithica, RPK (first in first person), MP5K (first person), Skorpion, HK21 (Awesome!), M14 (wood!), M134 (nicknamed Death Machine), M16 (first person, burst), AKS-74u, and also that new blue-tinted scope, maybe a new version of thermal? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

You can THROW A TOMAHAWK?! That's awesome! Now if only you can melee with it... --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:16, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

== Over and Under shotgun, HK21 plus even moar footage ==
As seen in this video: http://www.gametrailers.com/video/team-deathmatch-call-of/703936

There's also more new MP footage up on Game Trailers and floating around YouTube. [[User:Swamples|Swamples]] 06:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:If you didn't notice, the handgun at the beginning was an ASP. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 07:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:This killicon, taken from this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToRG_z3ib-o looks like a full sized Uzi: http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/1143/uzi.png -The Unsigned

== Create A Class Video ==
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAM5AZxmT_M

WAY too much to write, just take a look, and at his other BO vids while youre there. Also, awesome pistol selection :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 07:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:While looking at the Create-a-class 2.0 vid shown here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCzSImy-xm4, I found it rather odd for the choice that Treyarch was going with on the weapon selection for the pistols at the 0:23 mark. Wouldn't it make more sense to place the Makarov PM as the starting pistol because of it's weak 9x18mm cartridge? I'd personally would have liked to see it like this:

*Makarov PM
*ASP
*1911
*Colt Python
*CZ75

[[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 10:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

== Full Weapon List ==
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jatp6Fgs-ak
The video's not too interesting, most of this is stuff from other videos, the cool part is in the description. Note that he wrote MAC-11 instead of CZ-75.

SMG: MP5K, Skorpion, MAC-11, AKS-74u, Uzi, PM63, MPL, Spectre

Assault: Enfield, M14, FAMAS, Galil, AUG, FAL, AK-47, Commando, M16, CLASSIFIED (There's actually no M1 Garand)

Shotguns: Olympia, Ithica 37, SPAS-12

LMG: HK21, RPK, M60

Sniper Rifles: Dragunov, WA2000, L96A1

Pistols: ASP, M1911, Makarov, Python, CZ-75

Launchers: M72, RPG-7, Strela, China Lake

M202 & M134 are apparently Kill Streaks and personally I think the Classified AR is the G11

:ASP seems like an odd choice to put in a CoD game. Relative to the game, it seems like they went out of their way to put in a pistol that isn't that much different in function to a Makarov. (A small pistol with a small magazine.) Why not just a Walther P1? Or a SW M39? Looking down the sights of the guttersnipe will be interesting though. And I again applaud Treyarch for bringing in guns that have been otherwise neglected in gaming. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:58, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if these are all the weapons or if there are less in this public version, though since it is a full reveal and they make sense how they are, it's reasonable to assume these are all of them. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 08:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

EDIT: The KS-23 isn't on the list for some reason, meaning this build may not have all the weapons, or the person who made the list simply missed it as it is the only known weapon not there. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 09:55, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:Someone found a screencap of the ingame M60. http://a.imageshack.us/img834/7093/m60j.jpg

::I don't think the M202 or the M134 are Killstreaks as if you look at the "Create a class" video above around the 0:36 mark it lists all the Killstreaks. As far I've seen in the trailers, the M134 is rather ironically called "Death Machine", so it might just be a high level machine gun class weapon that the user has to buy. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 13:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

: I think the M202 and M134 might only be in the "Wager" game modes, were everyone has a chance to earn one.

== Seriously.... ==

This is going to be worst CoD game. Minigun ? Flamethrower attachment ? Jesus . Even most stupid game from most stupid studio with most stupid gameplay will be better than this shit.

: If you say so.

Whatever you say, man, and what's wrong with a flamethrower attachment? [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 00:48, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Its completely idiotic.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:32, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

:I think it sounds fucking AWESOME. No, it won't be realistic. But it's rule of cool, brohan.-protoAuthor 11:00, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, once you get over the fact that this game is inaccurate as hell, it starts to look pretty badass [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 11:38, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Peh, I'm past the point of even expecting this to be a realistic game. I'll enjoy it for what it is, but there's no way in hell that we're getting realism out of this. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 06:46, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

== Iron sights ==

Whats with all the guns having that same back sight, i was ok with the CAR 15 and even the FAMAS having it, then i thought that it was pushing it with the AUG. Then i saw that the M60 has those sights too??!!! I hear you can customuzie your sights and i hope to god you can, cause i would be pissed if all the guns had extremely similiar iron sights --[[User:FirearmsNewbie|FirearmsNewbie]] 11:43, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

'''IS WONT BE CUSTOMIZATED !''' Its just cool to have them, you dont understand ? 7-year kids / 99% of BO players ) wont even recognize M16 and M4. SO WHATS THE PROBLEM ? Epect nuclear grenade flamethrower tactical launcher screen in nearliest days.

: ...a little excited there, bro?

From what I've heard, there will be an 'improved iron sights' attachment. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 06:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

== Enfield ==

Has anyone else noticed then in the create a class trailer when he goes in to primary weapons it says enfield ? anyone wanna put that up ?

:I would but it's too little info to draw a conclusion on what EXACTLY "Enfield" is. It could be the SA80 but at the same time it could be something else, it's best to hold off for now until more info shows. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 15:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:Yeah, it is most probably a SA80 but it can also be the L1A1.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 15:55, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

::When I saw Enfield, I had assumed it would be the EM-2. When was the last time anyone referred to either SA-80 or L1A1 as an "Enfield?" I google in "enfield prototype," and a picture of the EM-2 is the first thing that comes up. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:01, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Ya id say its going to be the EM-2 because on the killfeed for a teamdeathmatch i saw there was a weapon that looked like it

If not the EM-2, it could be one of the Enfield SA80 prototypes (E60-, XL70-...etc) - Enfield did start the SA80 program in the late 60's so it could be possible for them to show up. It might also explain why Treyarch had that airsoft L85 on their wall.

It's an XL64, at least according to the create-a-class picture. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 17:06, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I think - not sure though - in the multiplayer overview video, at 6.41 to 6.49, it is possible to view the Enfield with iron sights in first person - it has the SA80 type rail, a green-ish cheek rest on the left of the reciever and a green-foreguard. I could be mistaken though. If someone could get the screen shots up for closer inspection, it might be easier to tell. [[User:Spanner|Spanner]]

You mean like [http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/File:L85_7.png this?] [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 19:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Bingo! You can see the real SA80/British 'dovetail' 19mm optics mounting rail (under those weird iron sights...)Cheers [[User:Spanner|Spanner]]

It's the XL64 for sure, saw it in the video a couple sections down ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Which is the same video I pulled the create-a-class image from in the first place. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 21:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah... not my best moment there, lol. ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:21, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

== Burst M16? ==

When I saw the recent multiplayer trailer, I coulda sworn that the M16 was firing in 3 round bursts. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:It was, and while idont mind it being Burstfire, i do mind that they call it the M16 Raffica.--[[User:Smish34|Smish34]] 17:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Well I do cause there's no such thing as a burst firing M16A1. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 17:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:In the Black Ops world there is. GET WITH THE TIMES EXCALIBER!!!!1--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

And why should they call it the "Raffica"? (I know it's Italian for burst, but whatever.) [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 18:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

On the extended trailer thing on the xbox dashboard there is a Burst M16 and its called M16 raffica

A burst M16A1 is stupid. Havent these guys seen a Vietnam era movie? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:22, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree it's stupid, but I suppose it will help make up for all of those full-auto A4s that are in every single movie. ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:41, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

First off, FIVETWOSEVEN, what does "get with the times" have to do with anything? That made no sense. In the Black Ops world, they operate outside of ordinary methods of operations and tactics. They go into extreme conditions and use the best equipments they can get their hands on but as I said before, they don't acquire guns that havent been invented yet and the military mentality of soldiers back then are different than they are now. A soldier during the Cold War would see any new technology pointless instead of an advantage because of the training and mentality, the if it isn't broken, don't fix it. Special Forces were no exception. Sure they were outside the ordinary, but they wouldn't have just say "hey, I want a gun that can do the following thing, can I have one? If it doesn't exist, I'll just get a gun smith, invent the parts and materials and make it exist." That's not how things work in real life. Yes this is a game and I've just given up on trying to convince people otherwise. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 23:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

:*WHOOSH* That was the sound of the obivious sarcasm flying over your head.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:31, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

:I think he means it's now obvious Treyarch doesn't care, so why fret over it? Short of some weird plot twist that we're currently unaware of (and again, we know absolutely nothing about the plot,) Treyarch simply doesn't seem to care about historic or technical accuracy. They're selling games to kids and stoners, not history buffs and gun dorks. After seeing all the recent videos, I'm resigned to the fact that all we're going to get is a vastly enjoyable game with a lot of replay value. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:53, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Remember, it's still full-auto in Singleplayer, as it should be. It's just 3-shot burst in MP so it doesn't make pot-head COD kids heads explode. Also, where do they call it the M16 "Raffica"? In the Create a Class videos they're listed simply as M16. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 02:36, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh it's only burst in multiplayer? Good. In multiplayer, anything goes. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:28, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

== Another video ==

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G94SolEtpnc]

You get the see the M14 stock, the Enfield, and it confirms the G11 (There's a contract called "G11 Cruelty." --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:Ah, that would explain that one single classified weapon. [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 21:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
:Looks like they're leaving a lot of old stuff in - killstreaks, perks, sentry guns, weapons.
::As opposed to a CoD game without weapons? [[User:Acora|Acora]] 06:54, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

== A Question about guns ==

Do you think there are any possibilities of Daewoo K1A or K2 appearing in this game?

I think its about time some major game has put in guns made in Asia.

K2 is a really accurate rifle, it could serve as the 'ACR' of this game and K1 can be like MP5K or UMP of this game
:[[Men of Valor]] had a Type 56. Does that count? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:14, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

We've already seen all the guns that are going in game. So quite slim chances there. Also, sign your posts. [[User:The Wierd It|The
Wierd It]] 08:56, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

: I don't think we've quite seen all of them. We've seen all of the Assault Rifles and Handguns, and only some of the LMG's, SMG's, Sniper Rifles, and Shotguns. And that video a few sections up with supposedly all of the weapons in the game in it's description, is most likely incomplete. I seriously doubt there are only 3 sniper rifles. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 02:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
::Didn't people doubt only 4 sniper rifles with MW2?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:30, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

: Perhaps, but they only needed 4 to fill out the basic sniper rifles roles of COD. A bolt-action, a large caliber, a jack-of-all-trades, and a low recoil-low power. But with only 3, and moreso because of the 3 that we've seen, we should expect more, because so far we've only seen the bolt-action and two normal semi-auto sniper rifles that shouldn't be all too different from each other. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 05:33, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

==FAMAS correction==
That's not a G2 FELIN, it's a F1 FELIN prototype. The one in the screenshots is based off the F1 model (note the small triggerguard and straight magazine). The G2 FELIN platform is based off of the FAMAS G2 and is distinguishable by the sheer massive amount of stuff strapped to it.--[[User:PistolJunkie|PistolJunkie]] 18:47, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

All the photos of the G2 FELIN I've seen have the small trigger guard. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 22:57, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

==Unknown Machine gun or Assault rifle?==
[[Image:Codbp_uklmg.jpg|thumb|none|400px|]]
Here is a picture seen in new multiplayer tralier.

:It's a HK21. Watch in HD, it says in the bottom right. [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 15:57, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

==Unknown rocket launcher guide missile==
I seen in new multiplayer tralier.

The only thing I've seen that sounds like that is the 'Arch Angel' killstreak weapon, a missile guided by the player via a camera. (Similar to the Predator guided missile from Modern Warfare 2's killstreaks except that 'Arch Angel' appears to be a shoulder-fired system) [[User:Spanner|Spanner]]

Thank for information guy.In cod wiki they call "Valkyrie Rockets".
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Archangel
[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

== Flamethrower ==
I seen few second on enemy hand in new multiplayer tralier.

:It's an underbarrel attachment, too. [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 15:54, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

== Grim Reaper? ==
In the wager match video, after the player gets a kill with the WA2000, you see him switch to something called the grim reaper but you never get to see what it is, any ideas?
:It's what they've dubbed the M202. It's kinda like how they called the M79 the Thumper. As I recall, the M202 is a killstreak reward. [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 15:54, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

:: Yeah aparently this game has several 'super weapons', but I'm not sure of the context of their use. But surely they won't be unlockable for custom classes, the "Death Machine" had a 400-somethin round belt.

::: The Death Machine (M136) and Grim Reaper (M202) are obtained from care packages now. Also, sign your posts. [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 19:32, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

== Opinions on the game so far ? ==

I know everyone is going to have a different opinion but i personally think this game is gonna be the worst one yet. The weapons,the attachments,the killstreaks look so bad and the game is just gona be filled with little 10 year olds who only quickscope and camp! The next one by sledgehammer games sound better! Anyone else agre? -- GunGunGun
::I haven't seen anything about the sledgehammer installment. Is there anything out there? I just know that officially, what's left of IW is still working on MW3. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:00, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
: Call Of Duty is dead since MW2. Last good one was CoD5 ( ''But it wasnt nothing more than good'' ). So i dont expect things get better after Black Ops. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 09:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
: Considering that there's been no news at all on the Sledgehammer Games one yet, I have no idea how you could know that it will be better. Sounds like you, like some others here, are just angry that the guns and add-ons in the game make no sense for the era rather than whether or not it's fun to play. [[User:Swamples|Swamples]] 18:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
::The guns don't make sense at all, not just because of the era. I mean flamethrower attachments, handheld miniguns, the same rear sight on many guns, 20-round mags holding 30 rounds, semi-auto shotguns impossibly cycling with dragonsbreath ammo. Before MW2 the Call of Duty series was known for its accuracy and attention to how the guns really work, as well as the weapons for the time periods the games take place in. And GunGunGun has a point, it's just going to be the same chaotic multiplayer as MW2, a bunch of stoners and kids making themselves feel better by corner camping, tubing, and quickscoping. Treyarch only seems to have done things to promote those playing techniques, not discourage them like they should. -Mandaloin
::: Cry some more then? It's pretty obvious that you don't like the gameplay style. There are many, MANY gamers out there that would disagree with your tastes, and those are the ones that Treyarch is aiming to please (along with those on the fence over some of MW2s perks/killstreaks which were changed for the better). So what if it's not all realistic, the key point in a video game is if it's any fun to play or not. Last I checked, I couldn't actually survive crashing a Ferrari at 100MPh at Laguna Seca either, but it is sure as hell fun to play a game that allows me to get back up and try again without it being "game over" for me. [[User:Swamples|Swamples]] 06:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Meh, quit complaining, it's a video game. If you want realism go play ARMA or Operation Flashpoint. It does look better than MW2, that I will say. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 21:41, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

I just love how people can criticize a game, when yet, they haven't even played it. [[User:Hoot471|Hoot471]] 21:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
:I just love how people keep saying that. We don't have to play it to criticize what we've already seen of it. -Mandaloin
:: Yeah, you kinda do. If you have not actually sat down and played this game, you're only assuming it's gonna be bad by just looking at it. [[User:Swamples|Swamples]] 06:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

== PM-63? ==

Where did we see that? [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 13:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

:[http://blackops.digitalwarfare247.com/weapons/sub-machine-guns/pm63].--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 16:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

== Unknown SMG ==

[[Image:MPLdual.png|thumb|none|450px|]]

: They look like MPL's to me, and those are said to be in this game so I'm betting that's what they are. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 23:33, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
::Those don't look anything like MPLs. It's probably something we haven't seen yet. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 02:35, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
:::Actually, I found this picture under Walther MPL on COD: Wiki, but I thought they looked nothing like MPLs, so I decided to put it as unknown and see if someone else knew what these were. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]]
:They kind of look like Arsenal Shipkas. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]

The weapons in this game may be achronistic as hell, but at least they made them interesting, most of the weapons on the page right now are things you don't see much of in games or even movies, especially nowadays, there's even this, a gun we can't seem to identify with a clear first-person shot of both sides of the gun. I've gotten bored of knowing every gun in a game when I first get it, so, regardless of whether this game turns out to be good, which I hope it is, at least the weapon selection is nice and original, especially for a modern mainstream FPS. :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 08:51, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

: Well I just went through the entire world.guns SMG database and the only thing that looks remotely similar to this is the Walther MPL, so if it's not a souped-up version of that than I don't know what it is. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 15:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
:::Nothing is in the right place. Either it's something else, or the modelers were told some other gun was an MPL and they didn't know any better. Did anyone else notice the icon on the left in the feed? Maybe it's whatever that's supposed to be. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

:: Maybe they're just modified Skorpions? [[User:Tanaj|Tanaj]] 15:45, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

i also went through the world.guns database and figured is could be a OTs-02 Kiparis http://world.guns.ru/smg/kiparis2.jpg
:Nice find, I agree. Wow, they must've dug pretty deep. I don't see how it'd be possible for this to be a modeling mistake, as I would think it's much harder to find one of these than an MPL. The above link doesn't work, here it is again. [http://world.guns.ru/smg/smg04-e.htm] --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 11:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

: Well whatdaya know, the one I missed. Good find. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 02:11, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

They are Skorpians in 9x18mm without the stocks. Looks awesome to me.--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 00:29, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

: We've already seen what the Skorpions look like, these look alot like that OTs-02 Kiparis --[[User:FirearmsNewbie|FirearmsNewbie]] 00:41, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

== KS-23 ==

The KS-23 isn't 12 gauge, it's 6 gauge or something like that. I know that it's 23mm, which is not 12 gauge, so that should probably be changed. --[[User:ColonelTomb|ColonelTomb]] 00:58, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia it's 6.27 gauge by American standards and 4 gauge in Euros. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 08:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Ummm how are they going to balance that? I'm assuming that a 6.27 gauge packs a hell of a lot more lead than a 12 gauge so I'd take a guess that it would probably be pretty powerful --[[User:Subiefan98|Subiefan98]] 22:41, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

:I presume the KS-23 is likely to have heavy recoil, small capacity (3 rounds) and a delay between shots. Also can't the KS-23 also function as a Grenade launcher as well firing firing a variety of shells such as Tear Gass, Flash Bang and White Phosphorous? I would marry Treyarch if they finally added Slugs to this baby! [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 09:13, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

== Stoner 63? ==

Hey Guys, I believe I've identified what seems to be a Stoner 63 fitted with some sort of telescopic scope, in this video: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOAAWWjfG_g]
--[[User:Mattatack92|Mattatack92]] 08:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a AR-18 but don't we have the full assault rifle list?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 23:55, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

: It's not an AR-18, the recievers don't match. It looks more like the 63, although it doesn't appear to have the ventilated barrel housing. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

After actually looking at a 63, this gun looks like it.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 02:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

[[Image:Stoner63-1.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Stoner 63 in rifle and LMG configuration.]]
[[Image:COD7Stonerpossible.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Here's a screencap from gameplay footage of the possible Stoner 63. Compared to the stock image I'd say it is.]] . - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]

==Reflex sights==
Just wondering about the reflex sights, were they even developed back during the periods the game is set in? Another thing I was curious about is that the M4 Spectre in the list shows it having a reflex mounted on it. While it is using a side-mount, wouldn't the stock get in the way if you try to fold/unfold it since it folds to the top of the gun?--[[User:ThePotShot|ThePotShot]] 14:41, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
: '''1,''' Yeah, i am almost sure reflex sight existed during cold war. There is even patent on internet, dating it into seventies.
: '''2,''' All SMG´s have apparently stocks removed for some reason. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 15:50, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

==Not exactly on topic==
Alright, I am having a pretty bad day with dealing all the crap my professors are throwing at me and then my roommate says something that is kinda pissing me off so I am gonna rant a little bit. Last night(this early morning actually, around 1), he decided not to do his homework and decided to watch a show about snipers and the amazing feats they pulled off including one about Hatchcock. It was pretty interesting until he ruined it after watching a sniper take out VietCongs using kentucky windage with his scoped (now busted) m14 after his helo was shot down by saying, "So what, I don't see how that is impressive, I can do that all the time in Modern Warfare 2." Now he wants to go buy Black Ops when it comes out because he wants to "pwn some noobs" and all the feature look really realistic just like in MW2. He goes on to say that he wants to become a Ranger because he thinks it is easy enough since he is smart since he was on a debate team, ran for state assembly, etc. and strong because he can do MMA and finishes that with he can drink a lot beer. I give him credit for having the balls to join the Rangers but at the same time, it feels like he is insulting them. Sorry for writing all this but I was having a shitty day and just had to let is all out and I figured it since he was talking of COD, that I would put it here. Alright, rant over, feeling much better now. --[[User:ThePotShot|ThePotShot]] 15:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh boy, is actual real military service gonna shit on his cereal, lets see just how easy pwning noobs is when your actually getting shot at, oh and apparently theres this thing called recoil in reality, suprising i know. Oh and no respawns either. On an actual related note this game is gonna suck, I do love the return of the 1911 to COD i just can forgive the erronious amounts of just horrendous anacronisms, and the flamethrower undermount is so retarded --[[User:Captain Snikt|Captain Snikt]] 02:10, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Here's a fun idea, hand a CoD fanboy an AR-15 with the bolt locked back, hand them a magazine, and tell them to fire it. See how long it takes them to realize that the weapon isn't magically ready to fire just because you slap in a fresh magazine. You get five points for every ten seconds it takes before they realize what the bolt catch is. You get bonus points if they pull the charging handle.--[[User:PistolJunkie|PistolJunkie]] 06:01, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Brilliant! Oh and pop that elusive saftey on too, just for good measure.--[[User:Captain Snikt|Captain Snikt]] 09:52, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd be impressed if they would give the back stock a flat slap after loading a fresh mag and charged the gun like a real badass.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 12:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Even better would be actually getting through the first phase of basic to even hold a weapon.--[[User:N-10 Aden|N-10 Aden]] 21:19, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd be even more surprised to find a gamer doing a proper tactical reload, instead of letting a mag drop to the ground and becoming confused as to why it doesn't magically appear back in his pouches.

==Kinda liking the weapons list==

Well, they are things you never see in other games, although the awp and famas and spas12 can go, and id love the a1 to be full auto. But, a revovler that makes sense, old school submachine guns, a pump action grenade launcher its kind of cool.

I do wish they didn't decided the nearly the same weapons from the other MW series like the AUG, SPAS-12, or the MP5K. They could have picked other pump action shotguns like the Remington 870, or another weapon aside from the MP5K. They should have stuck with the full size MP5. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 14:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
:Well, they do have the Ithaca 37. And at least the AUG is a rifle and not a LMG in this one. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:18, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I do know most of these guns really shouldn't exist but you can believe I will have a ton of fun with the under-barrel flamethrower with a smily face reflex sight on the G11(they better not mess up the G11).--[[User:N-10 Aden|N-10 Aden]] 21:15, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

At this moment, I am not bothered about weapons that don't exist at the time, but more on original choices. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

:Kinda of agree with you there, sorta disappointed though that they made the M16A1 burst fire in Multiplayer. Though it's hard to say exactly when all these guns appear, while yes we were told it was starting in Vietnam but IT could possibly star in other timezones too. From what I've gathered, you play as multiple characters so it's possible you could play as multiple characters in different time periods, 1 in Vietnam, another in Cold War and maybe a few fictional war zones in the early 2000's [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 08:10, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

:: Well, it seems that original M16 without forward assist is in game. Anyway - As far as i know M16A1 fired in 3-round bursts, no ?
:::The A1 is full-auto. The A2 and A4 variants fire bursts. [[User:Ramell|Ramell]] 10:10, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

I dont like how they use the correct 20 round mag model but make it hold 30. Hopefully the burst/30 rounds is online only, like in cod 4 where the m16 was full auto SP but burst MP.

== CZ75 ==

JUst curious, does anyone think that the CZ-75 might be the Automatic version of the weapon. Granted Treyarch wasn't going to add Machine Pistols but since it's the last handgun in the list and it costs 750 credits would it be possible? I mean Bad Company 2 had their 93R as their last unlock which was a machine pistol [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 08:28, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

: Well, it doesnt have to be automatic. CZ-75 is superior to all other handguns from list in real life.( maybe besides Colt Python ) - Its better than Makarov, ASP and even M1911 in all "stats" . Its probably best 9mm handgun.

::Not too sure as to how it would be better than a .45 caliber 1911. I can see it being better than the ASP or Makarov due to their small magazines of 7-8 rounds compared to the 75's 16 (9mm). Of course it does open the slight possibility that an Automatic conversion kit is available as an attachment [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 09:05, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
::: Its not just about calibre or mag capacity. CZ-75 is more accurate, bullet is faster and i think its lighter. Anyway - Its sure that heavier cartrigde is allways better :) But i would take CZ75 to combat instead of M1911.

:Maybe the developers just read a lot of Gunsmith Cats, and took Rally's speech to heart, but the possibility that it may be an automatic makes me sigh. I hope it isn't.-protoAuthor 16:08, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, The CZ-75 is not more accurate than a 1911
Secondly, there is no "best" 9x19 millimeter pistol, its all personal preference,
Thirdly, the .45 is a better combat round due to its lager grain bullet and more dispersion of energy on contact,
and Lastly, while caliber is not the most important factor, the .45 A.C.P is superior to the 9x19mm because the 9 is a small lightweight bullet, while the .45 is a large heavyweight bullet.
P.S. sign your posts.
~~ PunisherDave
: Well, i tested both CZ75 and 1911. I was doing better with CZ. Anyway - I would take it into combat because of for example mag size. And 9mm bullets are way much more common... --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 13:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Military 1911s almost universally sucked, with ultra loose fitting parts and 7 pound triggers, and nearly useless sights. 1911s in the civilian world, or the uber built special forces 1911, are nice. But your average GI 1911....not so. Im sure a cz75 would kick its ass in accuracy and reliability if you wanted to use more than ball ammo.
~~k9870
: Ágreed. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 13:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Those old 1911's had one thing going for them though, there was a hell of a lot of abuse you could put them through before they malfunctioned. Reliability is a factor. I'm not saying the CZ isn't reliable though, don't get me wrong. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 17:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

It was once said "the colt 45 will drop a charging bull dead in its tracks, but good luck hitting it.

Haha, while I do know (note how I'm just basing what I say off of research, so I am open to corrections. Hopefully one day I can fire a 1911 and CZ to really know the differences)that the old GI 1911's were often maligned for their lack of accuracy, I've also heard people say it isn't that big of a deal considering that it is a handgun. In a military capacity, the pistol is there when shit gets up close and personal and you need to defend yourself. When the guy is close enough that you can see the whites of his eyes, I'm sure you're not gonna have to be a deadeye to land shots on target. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 18:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
:My buddy's father was a Marine in Vietnam, and at least according to him, a lot had to do with the fact that their M1911s were just really old and worn. I would think that WWII production of M1911s would've been more enough to supply US forces for decades. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 18:29, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Ive heard they manuactured no new 1911s after ww2, and that they just swapped parts, keeping frame and slide. They were loose fitting, and rattled in holsters. a 7 pound single action trigger, and the sights are just awful, especially against a dark background, cheap 3 dot sights would be better. problem is when people think "1911" they think of the sweet modern ones. To be fair, military berettas are beat to hell too, and have known countless people to say the sights were misaligned, magazines had weak springs, etc.
The cz-75 though, this is the first time ive seen it in a game, its pretty cool. I cant wait to use it, im sick of the beretta being the staple 9mm.
-k9870

Misaliged sights are from them getting knocked around and is easily fixed, worn mag springs is through use and they are easily replaced.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 22:33, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

It is true that no new 1911's were purchased after World War 2. The same .45's that were on G.I's hips in Europe and The Pacific were being carried by U.S troops during the Gulf War in the 1990's. I've heard that the quality of the 1911's varied from gun to gun. Some were actually were in decent shape while others were just horrid. I don't believe they all suffered from the problems that K9870 is saying. Although I admit the standard sights on those guns are just awful, Most of the time I can't even make out the front post. A lot of soldiers I've read actually preferred a 1911 to the M9 and carried it when possible. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 22:37, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops

2010-09-21T18:21:57Z

ShootingLiberal: /* CZ75 */

Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops

2010-09-21T17:24:42Z

ShootingLiberal: /* CZ75 */

Talk:The Town

2010-09-16T00:50:59Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Jimmy O? */

==Unknowns==
[[Image:Town-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Jem (Jeremy Renner) fires a pistol.]]
:Looks like a USP. -[[User:The_Winchester|Dr. Awesome]]
:I agree, i think it's a USP Compact. -Scott; August 12th 2010
Am I the only one who thinks this movie looks like it will be awesome? --[[User:ManiacallyChallenged|ManiacallyChallenged]]
::Plus also this page is the talk of The Town. Puns are awesome.
And am I the only one who thinks that these guys are, like, alarmingly well-equipped for bank robbers? I WISH it were that easy to get a full-auto HK416. :(
:::Even if the registry was reopened you would still have a hard time getting one. HK would go out of their way to somehow stop that.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Keep in mind that this is MASSACHUSETTS that the movie is set in. Strictest gun laws ever. SKS rifles aren't even allowed to be purchased inside the Boston city limits. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 10:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

You know I have to admit I was thinking the same thing myself in regards to the weapons used by this crew and those in other movies like [[Heat]] or something. Where are these guys getting their firepower? HK's 416 is strictly in use by SOCOM or SWAT units. Sure the argument can be made they are acquiring some stuff on the "black market" but...come on!!! --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 20:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Heat actually made more sense than this one. AR-15 carbines are relatively easy to convert with drop in parts, Sigs and HK pistols are easy to find, and a semi-automatic HK 91 are nothing compared to an HK 416. [[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 00:56, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Well to stretch it, we can say this movie takes place during a time when the HK416's civilian variant has been released already and like in Heat, the character bought the civilian variant and put in a drop in auto conversion. It IS a stretch, but at least my theory explains how they at least got a hold of a 416.

Oh and to the guy up there saying that because this movie takes place in Massachusetts with the strictest gun laws ever doesn't mean ANYTHING to bank robbers or criminal in general. They coulda bought their guns outside of the state, transported them back to Massachusetts and then made them full auto. This is the fact showing that gun control in one state doesn't matter when all you have to do is go to the neighboring state. I mean, what's H&K really going to do when they find out that someone is using their guns in a bank robbery? You really think the gun company would go out of their way to make sure their name isn't tarnished when police have problem finding high profile criminals? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:25, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
:I should know what you can and can't do in MA, seeing as I live there. :P You can't even buy a handgun in Boston with a magazine that can hold more than ten rounds, any shotgun with a revolving cylinder and/or a capacity exceeding six rounds, a semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine capacity exceeding 10 rounds, any SKS, AK47, UZI, AR-15, Steyr AUG, FN-FAL, and FN-FNC rifle. I agree, your point is valid, but there's no need to sound all snippy about it. all I was saying is that obtaining that level of weaponry would be a fairly difficult task. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 21:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

And just as another stretch, it IS possible to get the HK USC, with is the civilian UMP and customize it to function like a UMP, but the best theory on why all the hard to get weapons is they most likely stole them from the Police. I mean, there are many departments that uses the UMP and there are some out there that do have the HK416. It wouldn't be TOO hard to believe they ambushed a cop car and stole their weapons or broke into a police armory. They seem to be good at breaking in and disguising themselves. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:32, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

==Yahoo Movies==
Yahoo Movies has some pictures.
http://movies.yahoo.com/photos/movie-stills/gallery/2274/the-town-stills#photo6
http://movies.yahoo.com/photos/movie-stills/gallery/2274/the-town-stills#photo37

== Jimmy O? ==

Is it just me or is that cop with the wooden stocked 870 played by Titus Welliver, who plays Jimmy O'Phelan on Sons of Anarchy
[[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 00:50, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:The Town

2010-09-16T00:50:41Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Jimmy O? */ new section

Talk:Kane & Lynch 2: Dog Days

2010-09-02T20:53:18Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Police revolver */

First game was unshiny at all, why would they make another one.

It was a financial success. Poeple liked the story and the characters but the gameplay was bad ...

AFAIR, game had 6.5 - 7.5 scores on major review sites. And plot was overfilled with cliches. AK74 was the only good thing about the game.

As much as I like to say otherwise, Kane & Lynch was pretty flawed game. I'm still looking forward the sequel, fingers crossed. --[[User:AlkoTanko|AlkoTanko]] 13:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey, who the hell took my picture of the track pants wearing loser out? [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 20:19, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

==Mystery pistol==
Would someone mind identifying this? I think it is the Beretta. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
[[Image:MysteryPistol_KLDD.jpg|500px|thumb|none|A thug with his ???? before getting his face fried.]]

Definitely a Beretta.

== Kane & Lynch ==

For those who've played this game. Which one is Kane, and which is Lynch?

I'm confused about this new movie Adaptation with Bruce Willis as Kane and

can't help think he should be playing Lynch. Michael Biehn should play Kane.

Lynch is the balding fellow with shotgun, other one is Kane (who looks like he has grown some hair since first game, odd).

Clearly, the case he stole from Retomoto was filled with Rogaine.

In the screenshot of Lynch holding a hostage, i have my doubts that the gun is a beretta, does anybody have any suggestions what it is? [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 01:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

It's a Norinco model 77B, you can tell on account of the unusual shaped trigger guard, which doubles as a one handed slide-cycling mechanism, you depress the front of the trigger guard and it causes the slide to cycle back. Doesn't exactly seem useful under stress, it would take a lot of force from just your trigger finger to manipulate the thing, even if you could reach it without adjusting your grip, but whaddya gonna do. --[[User:Toadvine|Toadvine]] 23:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

whos decision was it to cast jamie foxx as lynch?

The unknown SMG is a Steyr MPi 69 or 81

==Beta Access==
Hey, I will have a beta of Dog Days tomorrow. I will confirm most of the weapons

Could someone identify the shotgun in the limited edition picture [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 04:48, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks like some sort of 870 to me/ ShootingLiberal

I could've swore the tan framed handgun in the game was one of those Smith and Wesson M&P's in .45, not a Springfield XD. --[[User:Toadvine|Toadvine]] 18:26, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

== Thoughts of the game ==

You get used to the very grainy film style and the shaky camera angle. It does annoy the hell out of you, but there is something about these characters and what resembles a plot that hooks you. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 01:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree man, the story is damn short but the plot is a frantic one that doesn't let up over it's short lenght. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 01:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

The plot DOES feel very rushed, but it's fast paced. It keeps you hooked and it's very simple. But the ending <strike> was a bit off. All you do is run for a plane and there's no closure or ending scene.</strike> [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the spoilers, dude. [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 13:59, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Just preparing you for the blank ending [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 19:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

There's also been some complaints in reviews about the poor accuracy of the guns, coupled with low damage. I'm playing at normal difficulty and I have no trouble taking down enemies even with handguns. And as for the accuracy, well, some of the guns aren't exactly known for their pinpoint accuracy, nevermind that it's Lynch you're playing with: the nutjob with a gun whos entire idea of "tactics" is to draw his weapon and start rapidly pulling the trigger.--[[User:AlkoTanko|AlkoTanko]] 14:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

== The Tokarev TT-33 might be a Type 54 ==

[[Image:Russain ww2.jpg|thumb|none|300px]]

Look at the little lump near the rear, it looks like there would be a manual safety on the other side.

== Police revolver ==

Does anyone else like this revolver for some reason? I do and I don't really know why. I know Chinese weapons are (no offense) not exactly known for their quality and worksmanship, but this 9mm revolver just seems cool to me. --[[User:ColonelTomb|ColonelTomb]] 18:04, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't like it. I always pictured revolvers as big powerful weapons in .38, .357, or .44. A 9mm wheelgun, while effective I'm sure, just seems sorta wimpy to me. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 20:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Mafia II

2010-08-28T22:29:04Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Mauser C96 */

==.38 Special==
It's a Colt Detective Special Nickel 3rd Gen model - [[User:SmithandWesson36|SmthandWesson36]]

I doubt that its a Taurus. I don't even think they were around back then? The picture in the Demo isn't very detailed but it looks like a Colt/S&W and maybe even a Ruger blend... Since its a 5 shot I would have to say it would be a Smith J-frame. Perhaps a S&W Chiefs Special (I'm not sure the year this game takes place) ---Furious Oyster

The revolver is a six shot gun in-game. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Well it's not exactly the most accurate game out there. Look at how everyone uses a weaver stance when shooting. That wasn't common till the late 70s/early 80s.

Well, maybe that's the stance they all felt comfortable shooting with. Just because it wasn't common hardly means it DIDN'T EXIST! Remember, Vito has a military background, he could have started shooting that way and the rest of the guys picked up on it. Use your head! [[Special:Contributions/173.62.58.210|173.62.58.210]] 19:19, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

According to the Mafia wiki site, they said it is a S&W Model 12.

Judging by the cylinder release it is definitely NOT Colt.

Where do you see the cylinder release on the revolver?

In the demo, here's a screenshot I made: http://img810.imageshack.us/f/mafia22010082116541241.jpg/

== Smith And Wesson Model 19 ==

[[Image:Dirty Harry2.jpg‎|thumb|350px|none|]]
This does not look like a Model 19 to me. --[[User:Milkovich|Milkovich]] 23:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

It's possibly a Model 27/28.

== C96 Broomhandle ==
using a weapon unlock cheat on the demo you can get the Broomhandle Mauser as a handgun as well so im 100% sure its in the full game.[[User:Dutch Oven|Dutch Oven]] 04:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

== 32 round 1911 magazine? ==

"From the gameplay I saw, it shows Joe giving himself and Vito a Colt M1911A1 but with a 32 round magazine."

I have never heard of a 32 round magazine for the M1911 series... and those mags in the pics don't look nearly that large, the look like a 8-10 round mag. What gives with that description on the page? For that matter, why is the Thompson's mag listed as a "30-round drum"? Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe 30-round magazines for the Thompson is a stick.

In the DEMO the 1911 has a standard 7 round magazine.. I'm assuming there are 2 in-game versions of the 1911. The first with a 7 round mag and the second with an extended mag. There seems to be 2 versions of the Thompson so i don't see how there cant be 2 different 1911's.

It may be a machine pistol based off Dillengers 1911 machine pistol in .38 Super.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Okey just played a bit of the game. So major SPOILER ALERT!! During the hotel job, Joe hands Vito the custom made 1911. According to Joe there's only two in the world and they have them. It has a 23 round magazine. It's a shame i can't screenprint on this computer, just goes all black. It's a ordinary stainless silver 1911 with a little longer magazine.
A little update, if you visit Guiseppies he has 3 of these custom 1911 on his shelf for a mere 270$. Weird since there should only be two in the world according to Joe. :)
:: Well then someone who made the game didn't do much research, as the magazines shown in the screencaps are nowhere near big enough to hold 23 rounds. Even if it was a custom 1911 chambered in .38 they'd have to be double-stacked, even then I doubt the mag is big enough. I don't recall there being any 1911 variants designed to accommodate a double stack mag that far back. Even Dillinger's custom .38 machine pistol had a much longer mag than that.

==1911a1==

i think the 1911 in the gun shop looks more like a 1911a1 than just a 1911, it has the 1911a1 checkerd grips and also the cut outs in the frame right behind the trigger which the 1911 doesnt have, also the colour is more grey, like the 1911a1

thanks for the great page

==anachronisms and questions==
SPOILER ALERT!
One thing that's been bugging me is that the game begins in 1945 and the Remington 870 shotgun appears during that time period, Isn't that an anachronism? Though the model could be mistaken for a Winchester 1912. Another thing that bugs me is that during that 1945 segment, they use an MG42 that they get from the guy with the eye patch. I wanna know how they managed to acquire a German weapon during the war.

Hughjefender

The first bit is an anachronism. However, the MG-42 is easier to explain, as they probably just brought it back with them. Vito was a war veteran, so there can assumed to be other veterans like him in the mob who may have smuggled the gun back using their criminal connections. Lugers were often brought back by US soldiers as trophies of war, so the MG-42 isn't as big of a stretch. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 21:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

== Mauser C96 ==

I just went into Harry's and bought the Mauser C96 and I noticed that it takes .45 ACP ammo. Wouldn't that make it a Shansi Type 17?
[[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 22:29, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Mafia II

2010-08-28T22:28:18Z

ShootingLiberal: /* anachronisms and questions */

Talk:Mafia II

2010-08-28T22:27:32Z

ShootingLiberal:

==.38 Special==
It's a Colt Detective Special Nickel 3rd Gen model - [[User:SmithandWesson36|SmthandWesson36]]

I doubt that its a Taurus. I don't even think they were around back then? The picture in the Demo isn't very detailed but it looks like a Colt/S&W and maybe even a Ruger blend... Since its a 5 shot I would have to say it would be a Smith J-frame. Perhaps a S&W Chiefs Special (I'm not sure the year this game takes place) ---Furious Oyster

The revolver is a six shot gun in-game. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Well it's not exactly the most accurate game out there. Look at how everyone uses a weaver stance when shooting. That wasn't common till the late 70s/early 80s.

Well, maybe that's the stance they all felt comfortable shooting with. Just because it wasn't common hardly means it DIDN'T EXIST! Remember, Vito has a military background, he could have started shooting that way and the rest of the guys picked up on it. Use your head! [[Special:Contributions/173.62.58.210|173.62.58.210]] 19:19, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

According to the Mafia wiki site, they said it is a S&W Model 12.

Judging by the cylinder release it is definitely NOT Colt.

Where do you see the cylinder release on the revolver?

In the demo, here's a screenshot I made: http://img810.imageshack.us/f/mafia22010082116541241.jpg/

== Smith And Wesson Model 19 ==

[[Image:Dirty Harry2.jpg‎|thumb|350px|none|]]
This does not look like a Model 19 to me. --[[User:Milkovich|Milkovich]] 23:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

It's possibly a Model 27/28.

== C96 Broomhandle ==
using a weapon unlock cheat on the demo you can get the Broomhandle Mauser as a handgun as well so im 100% sure its in the full game.[[User:Dutch Oven|Dutch Oven]] 04:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

== 32 round 1911 magazine? ==

"From the gameplay I saw, it shows Joe giving himself and Vito a Colt M1911A1 but with a 32 round magazine."

I have never heard of a 32 round magazine for the M1911 series... and those mags in the pics don't look nearly that large, the look like a 8-10 round mag. What gives with that description on the page? For that matter, why is the Thompson's mag listed as a "30-round drum"? Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe 30-round magazines for the Thompson is a stick.

In the DEMO the 1911 has a standard 7 round magazine.. I'm assuming there are 2 in-game versions of the 1911. The first with a 7 round mag and the second with an extended mag. There seems to be 2 versions of the Thompson so i don't see how there cant be 2 different 1911's.

It may be a machine pistol based off Dillengers 1911 machine pistol in .38 Super.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Okey just played a bit of the game. So major SPOILER ALERT!! During the hotel job, Joe hands Vito the custom made 1911. According to Joe there's only two in the world and they have them. It has a 23 round magazine. It's a shame i can't screenprint on this computer, just goes all black. It's a ordinary stainless silver 1911 with a little longer magazine.
A little update, if you visit Guiseppies he has 3 of these custom 1911 on his shelf for a mere 270$. Weird since there should only be two in the world according to Joe. :)
:: Well then someone who made the game didn't do much research, as the magazines shown in the screencaps are nowhere near big enough to hold 23 rounds. Even if it was a custom 1911 chambered in .38 they'd have to be double-stacked, even then I doubt the mag is big enough. I don't recall there being any 1911 variants designed to accommodate a double stack mag that far back. Even Dillinger's custom .38 machine pistol had a much longer mag than that.

==1911a1==

i think the 1911 in the gun shop looks more like a 1911a1 than just a 1911, it has the 1911a1 checkerd grips and also the cut outs in the frame right behind the trigger which the 1911 doesnt have, also the colour is more grey, like the 1911a1

thanks for the great page

==anachronisms and questions==
SPOILER ALERT!
One thing that's been bugging me is that the game begins in 1945 and the Remington 870 shotgun appears during that time period, Isn't that an anachronism? Though the model could be mistaken for a Winchester 1912. Another thing that bugs me is that during that 1945 segment, they use an MG42 that they get from the guy with the eye patch. I wanna know how they managed to acquire a German weapon during the war.

Hughjefender

The first bit is an anachronism. However, the MG-42 is easier to explain, as they probably just brought it back with them. Vito was a war veteran, so there can assumed to be other veterans like him in the mob who may have smuggled the gun back using their criminal connections. Lugers were often brought back by US soldiers as trophies of war, so the MG-42 isn't as big of a stretch. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 21:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I just went into Harry's and bought the Mauser C96 and I noticed that it takes .45 ACP ammo. Wouldn't that make it a Shansi Type 17?

Mafia II

2010-08-20T01:26:25Z

ShootingLiberal: /* M1928 Thompson */

Mafia II

2010-08-20T01:25:50Z

ShootingLiberal: /* M1928 Thompson */

Mafia II

2010-08-20T01:25:06Z

ShootingLiberal: /* M1928 Thompson */

Talk:The Return of the Living Dead

2010-07-12T22:07:20Z

ShootingLiberal:

The comment about the officer having the finger on the trigger isn't needed in my opinion, back then many officers were taught to have their fingers on the trigger, some departments even made cut outs in the holsters so the officer could get his finger on the trigger faster [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 21:42, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
:I changed it or took it off rather. Fingers off the trigger didn't become prevalent until the widespread usage of Glocks because of the much lighter trigger pull. It's very unlikely you're going to have an accidental discharge with a revolver in DA mode, compared to a Glock. --[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 22:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Exactly, I wasn't sure if I should change it myself but thanks for doing it [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 22:07, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The Hitman

2010-07-12T21:58:10Z

ShootingLiberal: /* Heckler & Koch MP5 */

Talk:The Return of the Living Dead

2010-07-12T21:42:13Z

ShootingLiberal:

Talk:The Return of the Living Dead

2010-07-12T21:41:54Z

ShootingLiberal: New page: The comment about the officer having the finger on the trigger isn't needed in my opinion, back then many officers were taught to have their fingers on the trigger, some departments even m...

Talk:Deadliest Warrior - Season 2

2010-07-12T21:01:07Z

ShootingLiberal:

==CLIP==
Why does everybody on this show, even the "experts" call the magazines "Clips." It pisses me off to no end.-[[User:SargeOverkill]]
:Because they aren't actually experts. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 08:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Shocking-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

yeah even geoff calls them clips, i like the show but acknowledge its stupidity [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 21:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

== Moving Season 1 ==

Was it really nessessary to give Season 1 it's own page? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 14:17, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

:I only moved it because it was making the page too long. Kinda like how the 24 page was divided up into seasons; the page was also getting too long. [[User:Ominae|Ominae]] 00:55, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

==Small mistakes==
As I'm watching this show, I notice way too many small errors.
For example, in Spetznaz vs. GB, they list the Makarov as 9mm. While it's true that it's 9mm, the 9X18 Makarov round is NOT the same as the 9X19.

And the Ninja's weapon, the Ninjatō, never had proof that it was real, Ninja's used Katanas. Also, the Ninja wearing black, is just a stereotype, in the woods they would wear something like green.

:I was in a class that teaches the art of Ninjutsu and even the master said that ninjas use whatever they can get their hands on. They are real special forces like [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Another mistake I noticed in the Yakuza vs Mafia episode. The Walther P38 is listed as the Yakuza sidearm of choice, but in the specs screen shown for the weapon the illustration on top is a Luger P08.

==Richard Mackowitz?==
Maybe my eyes are deceiving me, but I swear that guy firing the 416 is Mack from [[Future Weapons]]. O_o Compare these shots...
[[Image:DW PSD demo.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Steve Gordon demonstrating an HK416 by firing it at a range instead of the PSD.]]
[[Image:DW PSD angle.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Another angle of Gordon firing with the 416.]]

...to one taken from the Future Weapons page of Mack crouched over a rifle while wearing similar headgear.
[[Image:Fwm992.jpg|thumb|none|400px]]

:Well that's because both of them are bald and have the same shape of a head. It did make me glance twice [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

==Pirates vs. Knights==
That line-up was pretty laughable. Not sure who the pirate "experts" were, but they didn't know a thing they were talking about. Pirates carrying at least 4 to 6 pistols, a blunderbuss, AND grenados...yeah, no. And even going as far as to called them "trained soldiers." Pirates were poor rag-tag pillagers. Few were ever armed with more than one firearm and the chance for misfires for the flintlocks and the blunderbuss is ridiculous. Overall it would've been a sword fight and the knight's shield and sword combo with combat training would've easily taken down the pirate--no contest if the knight stayed on his horse.

--
This show is awesome, heh I hear they are going to have Green Berets vs. Spetsnaz and IRA vs. Taliban

Yeah it is awesome. I think the Spetsnaz are going to win over the Green Berets next week. I haven't heard anything about the IRA vs. Taliban fight though.

:I agree totally. Spetsnaz could kick Special Forces' ass. but dont tell any i said that! -[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]]

Whoever edited the page last is totally wrong. It should have the M4A1, AKM assault rifle, Mossberg 590, Saiga shotgun, RGD-5 grenade, M67 grenade, Beretta M9, Makarov pistol, SVD Dragunov, and M24 sniper rifle.

==Ridiculous show==
This show is ridiculous. Many of the match ups aren't fair to either or both sides, since they are just 'assuming' many things. Also many of the comparisons are purely '''apples vs oranges'''. In the Mafia versus Yakuza, comparing a Thompson to a Sten????? WTF? Two different types of guns for different purposes. the M1928 with a 100 round drum is ridiculously HEAVY and no soldier would want to be running around a lying prone with it (which is why the M1 &M1A1 with their stick mags were developed in WW2). The Sten is lighter and holds a 32 round stick mag. It was a very simplified design done for the sake of mass production during time of war, and it was much more suited to commando raids and airborne ops than the Thompson with a 100 rd drum, just because of weight and types of magazines.

Sure the historical tests of the weapons are fun and all, but all serious military historians think that the "matchups" are just stupid. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 22:12, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Dude, the Sten and the Thompson are both submachine guns for close range fighting, and no military ever used the 100 round drum. Thompsons in airborne landings used 30 round magazines that were much better than the Sten's.

:''I've seen the first episode, the Yakuza vs. Mafia matchup, and this week's Spetsnaz vs. Green Beret episode. I can't say I have a problem with the Spetsnaz "winning", but I have serious problems with the testing they did. The ballistic knife over the E-Tool was the most ridiculous thing I've seen, by far, and while I can't say I've studied Spetsnaz tactics to any real extent, I refuse to believe that they really move around like they're shooting Hard Boiled 2.'' --[[User:Clutch|Clutch]] 03:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
[[Image:SpetnazPoster.jpg|center|600px]]

::I agree, their shooting style was just...overblown. The fast crouching and ducking and shooting was just...stupid. They shoot their sidearms with one hand apparently, and got a better hit ratio over the Green Beret who shot faster and holding his M9 with both hands. The comparison wasn't as bad as the Mafia and Yakuza where they compared a P38 to a double barrel shotgun. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

::::''I have read several articles written by former police and military combat instructors which discuss how the singlehanded grip, while less effective for long range target shooting, can be much more flexible and effective than the double handed grip. Practice is far more important than which grip is used, if the Spetsnaz soldier had trained more with a one hand grip than the Green Beret did with both than he would obviously perform better. Keep in mind, handguns have been around since the 1500's and the two-handed grip did not come into widespread usage until the 1950's.''

:::''The "final fight" was even worse. I'm fairly certain that any self-respecting soldier is going to carry multiple mags for any weapon they carry into battle. Here, the Green Beret empties his M9...and drops the gun. I almost screamed at the TV, "RELOAD! RELOAD, YOU FOOL!" At least the one on one between the Yakuza and Mafia soldier seemed somewhat realistic.'' --[[User:Clutch|Clutch]] 19:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

:I know, it's like the Green Beret was thinking "Hey, I still have extra mags for my M4, but I rather use my M9. Hey, my M9 is empty, but instead of reloading, I'm going to use...my SHOVEL!" It's ridiculous. In one of the other forums, someone suggested that the show shoulda gotten the Russian and Green Beret guys in a paintball field, gave them guns that shoot sim ammo and rubber knives and have them go at it. At least that would have been more accurate results than some computer tests! [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
:::I agree that a paintball match at a combat town would show off more of their small unit tactical training, than the bullshit 'test' they do on the show. That would be interesting to see! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure you guys caught the mention of the M4A1's four-position selector *rolls eyes*... Obviously the guys they hired to portray these ex-SOF soldiers didn't do their homework. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

:It would make sense to compare ANCIENT weapons. I think there are interesting comparisons between short swords, pikes, spears and other edged weapons FROM THE ANCIENT WORLD. But when it comes to firearms, COME ON! Like someone said, they 'tested' the Yakuza versus the Mafia by testing the Walther P38(!!) to a double barrel shotgun(!!!??) WTF? How about comparing the P38 to the Model 10? or the 1911? But then the Model 10 and 1911 were also used by the Yakuza. All of the Firearms testing on this show is ridiculous and stupid. The only valid 'comparisons' are between the ancient weapons, like the Zulu short spear or the Roman sword or the Scimitar, etc. etc. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:04, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

::There were problems in comparing "ancient" weapons. I mean the Viking vs Samurai, they didn't mention that Vikings had bows and arrows too and they "tested" a viking axe to a Samurai sword! They didn't want to do the long sword vs the Katana why? I mean the samurai also used spears, but they didn't show that in the episode, just a bow vs a viking spear. Come on! The ninja vs spartan was also weak since all the weapons weren't matched up except sword against sword. Well at least for the next 2 weeks they're going back to actual warriors of old like Shaolin vs Mauoi, and 2 actual people of history Shaka Zulu vs William Wallace. But their last episode is going to be the worse, the IRA vs the Taliban! That is just..stupid. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 11:59, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
: Yeah and in Vikings .V. Samurai, the Viking snapped the Samurai's spine w/ a battle axe, but lost anyway. WTF?-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 00:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

:::''IRA versus Taliban? Despite each group being completely different philosophy/theology/motivations/goals/limitations etc, the show could just show a Bomb going off in a pub (IRA) or a truck driving UP to a marketplace and then blowing up (Taliban)....Yeeesshhhhh! MPM2008''

The only thing I've liked about this show so far was the actual ninja vs Spartan battle. It was fairly entertaining, if nothing else (even though it was a serious mismatch). Like comparing an AK to an AR hasn't been done 674356789765545675 times before...? They should stick to matching up pre-gunpowder warriors, IMO. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

:If it was Ninja vs Pirates, then that would be awesome [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

:Fuck that, i want zombies versus gladiators[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 16:55, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I just saw the Yakuza vs. Mafia & Spetznaz vs. Green Berets episodes, and I think I have a migrane now. They used a Luger P08 as a "Walther P38" and had a so-called "expert" saying the M4A1 has a "4-position selector switch" and is capable of both burst AND automatic fire. What the hell? They also had a Saiga-12 with a hunting-style stock rather than the mil-spec pistol grip. They also used a 7.62x39mm folding-stock AK to represent the 5.45x39mm "AK-74 carbine" I guess this should be expected from a channel with shows as ''Manswers''... [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 01:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

:Another glaring error; in the Green Berets/Spetznaz episode, U.S. military personnel NEVER wear berets in combat! That is PURE hollywood! Those soldiers would have been wearing kevlar helmets, patrol caps, boonie hats, or -maybe- a baseball cap, but NOT their freakin' berets which are only worn in non-combat situations such as when on base stateside. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 18:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
::The Green Berets and Navy Seals during the Vietnam War did use Berets, Bonnie hats, Bush Hats and those baseball-cap style green caps they used when they weren't in combat. Alongside all kinds of bandanas but, they depicted the green berets and the russians in modern day and even that Spike TV managed to fuck up. The Spetznaz doesn't use AKMs. They use AK-74Ms.

::Well, the were accurate enough by at least saying the Spetznaz use AK-74s, but in the show we don't see a single AK-74 like gun at all. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:37, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

:::They said AK-74 not AK-74M but that is just nitpicking. They also called the AK-74 a carbine not a assault rifle. This show is dumb.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 18:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

==Four position Safety==
I hate to break it to some of you but they do in fact make a four position safety for the M-16 series rifle. You used to be able to buy them a few years back in the Shotgun news.[[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 17:19, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
:Really? That a fact? But we're talking about the Green Berets here. Do you really think they use M4s with 4 selections? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I wouldn't know the only time I have handled an official US issue M-4A1 was about ten years ago and it was safe-Semi-Full. from what I understand the four position safety was designed as an experiment and latter sold comercially. Given that the weapons are shown comertially then it is possible that such a selector on that rifle. As far as the "Green Beret"'s go I'm sure they have an example or two stored in the back of a bunker or two. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 18:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

There was NOT any four-selector AR-15 based rifle EVER created. If you ever had any AR-15 rifle dissasembled, or even if you ever handled any, you would have know, that a four-selector switch is purely impossible. ALL issued variants have/had only a three-position selector switch - either for save/semi/auto (early models Colt 601,602, various carbine versions, the M16A3 and others) or save/semi/burst (M16A2, M16A2 etc). Concerning the M4 Carbine, the original version, Colt Model 720, adopted in 1994, was capable of firing three round burst and had M16A2 style non-remouvable carrying handle. M4A1 variant (Colt Model 925) and the SOPMOD version are capable of fully automatic fire, have remouvable carring handle, and in case of SOPMOD and M4 MWS (Modular Weapon System) are fitted with M5 Knight's Armament Corporation RIS/RAS. [[Ragnar -unregistered user]]
:Sorry idiot i am calling you on your Bullshit. Look in the back issues of Shotgun News for about the past decade. it may take a while to find comertially available four position safty's for not only the M16 but for Romanian(?) AK varients. Tey were the sorts of adds that grabbed my attention because they were the sorts of odd things that you find in places that store small arms and/or the parts of. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 22:15, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
::Adendum...(http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&S1=5760328.PN.&OS=PN/5760328&RS=PN/5760328 )Colt pattened the thing back in 1996.

This show is stupid, but It would be cool if they did Paul Kearsey VS Harry Calahan, Martin Riggs VS John Mclane, Josie wales VS Rooster Cogburn etc. At least then they would have an excuse for being so far fetched and rediculous.

==IRA Vs. Taliban==
I was kind of annoyed by the errors this show typically displays as always, but some notable ones were on Sunday with the IRA vs. Taliban episode. They claimed the Irish Republican Army used the "Armalite AR-15" as their main weapon, yet I was always under the impression they used the Armalite AR-18. And aside from that, hasn't Colt been the producer of the "AR-15" since the 70s? The guns they used on the show were M16A2/Colt AR-15 A2 HBAR rifles anyway, not Armalite guns. And they somehow tried to show the AK-47 was superior to an AR-15 by slapping a huge amount of mud on the action and pouring water down the barrel. The AK of course didn't jam and the AR did, but that's a dumb test. A gun can get dirty and jam up but if it gets THAT dirty, it isn't even a fair trial. Also, they compared an LPO-50 flamethrower to an RPG-7 (Norinco Type 69)? One is good for 20ft another can hit out at 300m. That's fair. And they claim both are MID-RANGE weapons. Also, they couldn't get the actual flamethrower used in the one incident, so they used this propane tank flamethrower that barely worked. And then they compare the slingshot to the bayonet. WTF??!! One is a hand-to-hand blade fixed to the muzzle of a gun, the slingshot is a mid-range projectile launcher. And if the IRA used it, it was more effetive than what they showed on the show. This show is dumb, I only watch it now because my friends told me it is awesome and I watch just to tear it down. Plus in the Gangsters episode, they kept saying "clip" instead of magazine, which was seriously pissing me off. And listening to David Wenham say the "British Sten uses a 30-round clip" made me want to kill everyone who makes this show. And the use of the term "drum-clip" is just insipid. There are better shows on sunday. Like Family Guy. I was mad I had to miss that just to watch this crap. Well, there's my review :) - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]

:You are right. The IRA did use AR-18s instead of AR-15s and i don't think that the IRA has a main weapon. Hell, i don't think that any guerrilla groups have main weapons. They just take what they can get, the only reason AKs are so common with guerrillas are because the Soviet Union and China gave those away like candy to enemies of the united States and because they are extremely easy to manufacture, and the use of the word clip in the show pisses me the fuck off. The computer guy also is extremely annoying. I want to shove a M67 up his ass.[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

:I agree, I mean, they even said in the show the IRA also uses AKs. The "British" troops with M16s is very inaccurate, since no one in the British military outside the SAS, SBS or other Special Forces uses M16 weapons. This is an even more insulting episode than the Green Berets vs the Spetsnaz! [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

::During the height of the IRA bombings, the British army still had the [FN FAL#L1A1|L1A1 SLR]] and Sterling SMGs. The Brits never used the M16 out side elite or non-conventional units. MPM2008
Well the British forces did have numerous AR15 type rifles in inventry for use by troops in jungle enviroments, such as Brunei and Belize. British troops from most infantry regiments could expect to do a rotation in ether country for jungle warfare training. Whilst the SLR was the most common rifle seen in Northern Ireland prior to the adoption of the SA80 series, AR15s were used there by non Spec Ops troops.

:The slingshot vs bayonet comparison definitely ties with ballistic knife vs E-tool as the absolute worst mismatches I've ever seen. And after the Luger/P-38 fiasco and those so-called "Green Berets" and "Spetznaz" making complete fools out of themselves by knowing pretty much squat about their weapons, I didn't think it could get any worse.I wonder what's next on this show. Bloods vs Crips? Rainbow Six vs Ghost Recon? Sam Fisher vs Solid Snake? Old Lady vs Pickpocket? Sheesh... When it first premiered, I really enjoyed the show, but now... [[Special:Contributions/24.7.190.251|24.7.190.251]] 03:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

:This is the LAST episode. I really HOPE there is no season 2, but if there is, I'll be there to screen cap it. And I wouldn't be surprise if it's gang bangers vs other gangs. And I'd bet on Solid Snake more than Sam Fisher and Rainbow Six over Ghost Recon. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

:No, I've got better ones: LAPD vs Blackwater and George Bush vs Barack Obama. XD [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 03:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

::Blackwater win over LAPD since the latter is a band of ex-military SF mercs, so no competition there. And if you want Bush vs Obama, just look at their presidencies and decided who wins or hope Celebrity Death match makes one. I'd say the LAPD SWAT vs the Columbian FARC. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
:::I agree that Blackwater has TONS of combat vets in their ranks. Bush versus Obama, we're not talking politics here, then '''only ONE of them had any military training, and he flew F-104 Starfighters''', so there's no comparison. So you have a 'community organizer' vs 'fighter pilot' neither one has useful small arms or hand to hand training so it's kind of a moot point. Overall the show is supremely retarded. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 05:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

:The most understated thing said so far. The show is supremely retard! Thank you [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
::The Green Berets and Spetznaz guys know absolutely jack shit about guns. and i agree with you MPM, this show is supremely retarded but it's Spike TV so what do you expect?-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 21:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

::::The Provisional IRA had both AR-15s and AR-18s, and some M16s as well. These were all weapons purchased by their Irish-American sympathizers in the U.S.; the M16s were stolen from Camp LeJune, while the AR-15s and AR-18s were purchased at gun stores. Qaddafi sent them large amounts of Communist bloc weaponry, including AKs (mostly Romanian AIMs), RPG-7s, DShKs, RGD-5 grenades, and CZ-75s. Qaddafi sent them some Western-made guns, too, including "Wonder Nines", FN MAGs, and the LPO-50s. But the IRA almost never used the LPO-50s, except in a single recorded incident at an Army checkpoint.

::::I also found it interesting that they glossed over the fact that the IRA was actually one of the very first terrorist groups in the world to use the RPG-7 (they first used RPGs as early as 1972). But anyway, I think it's a really ridiculous comparison because the IRA and the Taliban are completely different types of groups. The IRA is more of a gang than a guerrilla army, and would be squeamish if they had to engage in the sort of activities that the Taliban do regularly. Euro-commie radical wanna-bes vs. Islamist tribal mountain savages = the savages win. Not to mention that the Taliban's fund-raising practices are WAY above the IRA's. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 03:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

It funny how these people are like rrr "I am super awesome mega warrior" It is just funny how they call themselves experts. wouldn't they actually shoot each other or be arrested for terrorist activities? Beeteles

:It seems like all these experts are all assholes too that look at the opposing side as weak jerk offs [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Every time I watch this show, I end up laughing like hell, with their so called experts who keep flinching every time they fire a gun, hilarious. Also in the Spetznaz vs. Green Berets episode, the Spetznaz "sniperexpert" misses almost half of his shots, I mean WHAT THE FUCK, even I, the worst shooter in the world, could hit that target evey time with that kind of weapon, it's built for this job and he still misses. And he claims to be a former sniper, well time to work on your skills dumbass. -Jacco Croon-

== This Page ==
This Page needs alot of work. I will try to fix it later.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 19:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

:What do you mean "Alot of work"? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:38, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
::What i mean is that the screencaps need captions and some of the sections have no gun-pictures. It's more of "alot of work" as in quantity not difficulty.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 18:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Well some of the sections without gun pictures is because I didn't know which guns they were. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

== "Experts??" ==

I don't think that anyone on either side of the "Green Beret vs Spetnatz had been an "expert" for ten years or more. I meen the Green Beret was pathetic with the beretta and he had a beer belly that sticks out 20".-beeteles
:''Far be it for me to deem anyone's status at anything...I really think that the experts they get are actors who were just slightly better than the Z-list "talent" they got to do the re-enactments.'' --[[User:Clutch|Clutch]] 02:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
::I'm sure the "experts" are retarded actors that don't know a goddamm thing about guns or anything military in general.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 11:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
:::Case in point, Matt the Green Beret thinking his M4 was capable of both full auto and mechanical burst. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]]
::::And I've never met a Green Beret who actually wore his green beret into the field. -[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]]
:::::I have, but they were Nam era Green Berets.--[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 03:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

It also comes to mind that SF wouldn't typically be chosen for the type of "mission" that was portrayed in the closing battle. An op like that would normally be assigned to Rangers. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:55, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
:Really? Being not that informed or smart in shit like that,I always thought it was the enemy or situation that matterednot the operation. But again,I suck at shit like that. [[User:Pump_Shotty_Justice|Pump_Shotty_Justice]]
::Different units have different applications. SF would typically be dropped behind enemy lines to train indigenous forces and build alliances with them, while Rangers would carry out direct action missions. SF ''can'' do the latter, but they don't specialize in it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

== green beret vs spetznaz ==

well i watched the show mainly becauseit was a modern re-anacment and well...i fuckin hate this show. the so called experts were shitty shots with the beretta. the test were really un-fair. come on. mossy 590 shooting a pig from a few yards out is supposed to be a fair test to the seiga shooting about 4 different 'jelly' targets while moving and some were behind cover. a frag grenade in side a washing machine is fair compared to throwing a grenade in a plast-glass corridor. bullshit. they wouldnt really use an E-TOOL for a melee weapon the would use a K-BAR knife. they would use kinmber 1911 variants or maybe a MK23 (or is that black-ops forces). and wasnt the makarov replaced by some other gun recently (last 5-10 years or so) --[[User:Smish34|Smish34]] 15:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah the [[MP-443 Grach]]-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

:Well, Marines use KA-Bars, but many servemen use them because they are very reliable. Special Forces do use glocks and the occasional Colt, but the MK23 was phased out due to it being just overall too big of a weapon. And E-tools are extremely dangerous and quite effective when you slice something with it. -[[User:The_Winchester|Winn]]

:Couple of things I would like to point out. Yes, the Makarov is slowly being replaced by the GSh-18 pistol, which came out in 2000. I agree that the tests were incredibly unfair, though even in the shotgun test, the saiga won, even though it's test was unfair. I believe they used the E-tool as the Green Beret melee weapon because if it was just a knife against a ballistics knife, the ballistics knife would have too much of an advantage. With the E-Tool, which is still a very capable weapon, they at least have a longer reach in straight up melee combat. And no, as far as I'm aware, and this is supported by my limited research on the subject, the Green Berets would use the Beretta. The only branch that ever used/still uses a Kimber model was the MEU. [[Special:Contributions/71.199.132.177|71.199.132.177]] 19:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

should have been Delta vs Spetnaz...ahhaha just kidding, but seriously that episode pissed off a ton of people, you'd think that the Green Berets would be equiped with more customized M4s and such, and each fire team would be different. wheres the team's DMR? wheres the team's machine gunner? etc etc and i mean for both sides...and a shotgun is a secProxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0

dary weapon, never a primary when it comes to a fireteam, unless you're in SWAT or something. M9s, M11s, MEUs, etc etc, each Green Beret or Special Forces soldier has his choice of what kind of firearms he wants to carry.
overall...bullshit

do ya know what really pissedmeoff. when the spetznaz soldier threw the grenade in the washing machine he walked off and lit up a smoke like he was some badass cool soldier. very unproffesional. and made him look like a jackass. if i was on COD...hahahah just messing around im not an 8 year old--[[User:Smish34|Smish34]] 20:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

:So what? The Mafia guy put a rose into the pocket of a dummy after he mowed it down with his tommy gun. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 20:04, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Why exactly does the image comment on the Benelli M3 say that the M4 would do better? As far as I know, they are both semi-auto tubular-magazine shotguns with similar capacities; all the M4 brings to the table is its special stock, which doesn't add up to a significant advantage over a regular tactical stock unless you're talking varied terrain or engagement ranges (going from medium to CQB to short range and back again). I haven't seen this newer episode with the M3 (I only saw the one with the Remington M870 or something), but they probably used it in pump-action only (for that extra dose of bullshit).

[[Special:Contributions/70.118.116.239|70.118.116.239]]

:Actually it's a typo. I was refering to the M3, not the M4 since the M4 wasn't in the screen cap. I was saying that another semi auto would be better to compare to a semi auto shotgun like the Saiga [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:33, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Except the Benelli M3 is selective; you can switch between pump-action and semi-auto (the semi-auto has the same functionality as the Benelli M1, which is more or less the gold standard of rapid-response semi-auto shotguns; how can the Saiga, a re-purposed 12 Gauge variant of a sporter version of an AK, stack up to a purpose-built tactical shotgun?).

In all honesty, it really doesn't matter about fairness, because the whole test was rigged to begin with. We're talking about the same show that put a siege weapon against a battle axe.

[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]

==Meant for Entertainment==

I do not believe this show is meant to be taken seriously, rather it is meant for entertainment and possibly sending people into fits about whatever historical badass they were rooting for. I agree that the test ARE ridiculous, unbalanced and often seem rigged but I think the show was meant for viewing pleasure and a springboard for calm discussions rather than a reason to shout and call foul. Anybody with a brain, nay half a brain, could see that these tests and "experts" are fictitious. Hell, the "advanced system" they claim to use is MS Excel. Therefore I can only logically conclude that the show is not and never was meant to be taken seriously.By the way, the RPG-7 appears to be a a Norico copy.[[User:UH-H1|Bumblebear]]

:The RPG also seems to be a fake cause the way it was fired, it looked like special effects. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

::This would be a good show if they didn't fudge the "tests" and just pitted two very different people against each other. The problem with the show is that it's ridiculous, AND it tries to look real and scientific. Seriously, ditch the fake science, and Spike would be sitting on a f*cking goldmine. Zombies vs. Delta Force? Win. Pirates vs. ninjas? Epic win.--[[Special:Contributions/70.121.214.203|70.121.214.203]] 20:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I actually like this show, even though they may never show it in Australia, but I watched several episodes on the internet and it's interesting and ridiculously funny.

If they were going for shock value and the coolness factor, they would have used Simunition and a hit-detection rig instead of this "programmer" bullshit. Why did they throw the science in if they're going to just half-ass it? They should pack it in and just go for maximum collateral, like everything else that involves guns and Spike TV.

[[Special:Contributions/70.118.116.239|70.118.116.239]]

==Season 2==
Bad news people,there is going to be a second season. --[[Special:Contributions/66.168.55.164|66.168.55.164]] 01:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC) (ThePotShot)

So???

:What next? Delta vs Chinese special forces? LA SWAT vs Columbians? Abraham Lincoln vs Hitler? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Hey, those aren't very bad ideas. Maybe they might have them in future episodes. Also can we please cut down on the criticism because like what they said earlier this show isn't meant to be taken seriously and is rather more for entertainment.

:::I got it! MALL NINJAs versus COD Fanboys! Woo hoo! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 08:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

:No no, Mall Ninjas vs REAL ninjas and COD fanboys vs Battlefield fanboys [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

:Two new matchups- Attila the Hun v/s Alexander Great and Nazi SS v/s Viet Cong (WTF?) has been confirmed for Season 2 they are also doing jesse james gang vs al capone's too which seems a little one sided [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadliest_Warrior#cite_note-18].--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 16:39, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

::See, neither of those make sense. Attila and Alexander were better as generals then warriors, as opposed to Wallace and Zulu, who were both revered as capable fighters. The Nazi SS and the Vietcong doesn't even begin to make sense. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 02:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

According to wiki, there will be a CIA vs KGB, which is also...pretty vague. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Do you think they should do North Korean Army vs South Korean Army?

James Bond vs Jasone Bourne might be nice (Bourne wins)

Here's seaason 2's match ups,,according to Wikipedia:

SWAT vs. GSG-9: ''Ther'e both SWAT right?''

Aztec Jaguar vs. Zande Warrior ''Who's a zande?''

A Zande is essentially a north african tribal warrior... ~kinda~ like a zulu but with their own unique style of weapons

Jesse James Gang vs. Al Capone Gang ''Uhm, Thompsons vs revolvers. no contest''

Persian Immortal vs. Celt ''Ok, maybee''

Roman Centurion vs. India's Rajput Warrior

Somali Pirate vs. Medellin Cartel ''Guy with ruty AK vs guy with unlimited budget for wepons? Medellin win''

KGB vs. CIA ''What are they supposed to use?''

Vlad the Impaler vs. Sun Tzu ''Uhm, Sun was a THINKER, not a warrior, and Vlad is an overrated psycho.''

Ming Warrior vs. Musketeer

Comanche vs. Mongol

Navy Seal vs. Israeli Commandos ''Might be good''

:Ming Warrior vs. Musketeer - Musketeer has...guns. GSG-9 is German special forces. They are one of the world's first modern spec ops. They'll win. Attila the Hun v/s Alexander Great, they both had to be warriors on the field, because unlike Generals of today, back then, you have to be a good fighter to lead and these 2 live in similar times, so it's very possible. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

The Ming dynasty covers the 14th-17th century and utilized firearms as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musketeer#Musketeers_in_China. Maybe we'll see matchlock vs. flintlock? I imagine they'll bugger it up fairly badly.

Actually on the website they show "bio" pics of the ming warrior with some kind of 4 barreled handganon and the musketeer is the type from the 1600s era with a matchlock musket and plug bayonet so all and all both sides actually have "fairly primative firearms

:I have great expectations for the Navy SEALSs vs. IDF Commandos and SWAT vs. GSG-9 episode (hope the supposed experts do not spoil these two). Whereas the Jesse James vs. Al Capone, Vlad the Impaler vs. Sun Tzu and Ming Warrior vs. Musketeer episode are the most @#!*% selections and even a 8 year old can figure out the winners in the first and last one.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 04:53, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

::Personally I think the Navy SEALs vs IDF Commandos (um... ''which'' IDF Commandos? IDF has a special unit for everything from CT to cleaning the head...) is gonna turn out just as bad as SF vs Spetsnaz. They're gonna get actors who don't know crap about crap to portray their "experts" [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 07:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

:KGB versus CIA will be weird, because as far as I know they only carry handguns, so not much to compare unless we looks at document filing, penmanship, interrogation, and maybe watercooler conversations. Also, GSG-9 will @#!*% up SWAT, SS vs VC is retarded, and on the Bond thing, let's pull a Goldeneye and have "James Bond vs entire Russian army" cause we know how that works out. [[Special:Contributions/142.167.158.222|142.167.158.222]]

According to this site http://www.isayeret.com/guides/units.htm, Isreal has 31 spceal forces units. Even if only a third are commando-type units, which one fights the SEALs? Flotila 13, the IDF/Navy SEAL equivelent, is best, but who knows. --[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 00:03, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

"SS vs VC is retarded". Not so much as it actually happened. When the French started fighting the VC, they sent in the French Foreign Legion, who just cut the VC into ribbons. A journalist did some investigating, and found out that the FFL soldiers were actually former Waffen SS. There was great outrage in France and all of the ex-SS FFL were kicked out. That's when the French started losing. David.

for CIA vs KGB, isnt it possible its the SAD? (Black Ops) so they would probably be armed with a Sig or a Glock for a sidearm, and a heavily customized M4/416

== New complaints of the new season ==

:Just saw the new episode and when the GSG9 guy talked about the PSG-1, he called the mag a clip. Not once but 3 times. That just seemed out of place. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

ahahaha the VC would own the SS regardless. and that was funny when the GSG9 guys called the mag a clip, but they didnt even have a german accent...odd...LOL and why would they use a Mossberg when they have plenty of H&K shotguns...ahahahah this show is still bullshit when it comes to firearms comparision

:They're also inconsistent. During the IRA vs Taliban, they rated the AR-15 higher than the AK. But on the Back for Blood special when they pit the Spetsnaz against the IRA, they suddenly declared the AR-15 and AK to be evenly matched. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

It was funny when they mentioned the pirates and then mention the Somalis and I just laughed cause if you've been keeping up to date, the Somallis aren't having a good track record. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

:They should do Navy SEALs vs Somali pirates. They can do all their fancy "tests" and whatnot, but then when the end comes, show a short 30 second clip of SEAL snipers downing the pirates from 300 yards away from the stern section of a frigate. XD [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

well to anser Spartan198 qustition/comment it was becuse the taliban used the AK-47 and the spetnaz used the AK-74 carbine (still think it is a bull shit connclushion tho)--[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 12:11, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I dont know why i still watch this, i really enjoy the non firearm episodes, but seriously, can they sort the 'experts' out. Did anyone else notice one of the GSG9 guys faffing aroung with a winchester trech shotgun, WTF? And dont get me started on the PSW/M4/416 mark your minds up. I also didnt see the point in a non leathal ssection on a show called deadliest warrior. Deadliest. Id much rather have seen a pistol showdown the stun grenades an a wall of tasers, ok rant over. Till next week i guess - captain snikt

@Armyguy277: So? An AK74 is just an AKM chambered for the smaller cartridge. Otherwise, it's the same identical gun. FYI, no AK74s were ever used anywhere in this show. The Spetsnaz were armed with AKMs just like the Taliban were. And the AK74 isn't a carbine, it's a rifle. The carbine version of the 74 is the AKSU-74. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 09:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

In the GSG9 vs SWAT, the guys representing GSG9 weren't even GSG9 operators. One of them is a Gebirgsjäger, mountain infantryman of the Bundeswehr, who was never in the BGS/BPol. The other one, though a GSG9 combat instructor, was an instructor for hand to hand combat. The two SWAT guys on the other hand, were actual D platoon officers. The two German guys are good, but when they do the room clearing, they can't match the speed of someone who actually participate in mission or train everyday.

Also, I found the stingball grenade vs. taser shockwave comparison to be completely bogus since they are totally different class of weapon. When the German guys point out that the stingball is more maneuverable, they just use a single taser and test it on a subject and then declare taser superior. I mean WTF... For me, D platoon could do no wrong, but this show is totally unfair to the GSG9. --[[User:Wildcards|Wildcards]] 19:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, the GSG9 guys' time in the room takedown "test" seemed a bit too fast for what they actually did. I also noticed they had a particularly slow rate of fire. I know I counted at least half a second between each of the three rounds one put into that first target dummy. And I'm not too sure of their reasoning for yelling "target" loud enough that everyone in the killhouse could hear. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Also, and is it just me, but did anyone notice one of the "operators" handling a Winchester 1897? I swear I saw it at one point. Also did the LWRC PSD switch back with a standard M4A1 when they were switching between "prep" and live fire? Also I have to agree with the "comparison" of the stingball/taser shockwave. The stingball would be the more practical of the two whereas the shockwave, though cool looking, is almost impractical. Seriously if riot cops have to set that thing up before use ya think maybe the rioters will rush them before it can be deployed?

In addition the one thing I found odd, and please correct me here, is the SWAT use of lethal force. I was always under the impression that SWAT used lethal force as a last result (yes I know this was a "combat" situation) but, at their core, they are cops who prefer to arrest suspects. I refer specifically to one scene where a SWAT operator guns down a wounded GSG-9 operator. GSG-9 on the other hand is, by their very nature, supposed to do nothing but use deadly force. Rant completed [[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 02:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

:Well, GSG 9 is technically a police tactical unit too. When the situation permit, they would attempt to arrest suspect too (hence the use of non-leathal weapons such as the stingball). Just as for SWAT, when the lives of civilians or officers are threatened, SWAT officers wouldn't hesitate to use deadly force to neutralize the suspect. As for the combat simulation at the end of the episode, it was the dumbest thing I ever saw. The only amusing part for me was that the taser shockwave proved inferior to the stingball grenade in actual combat. --[[User:Wildcards|Wildcards]] 10:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I've always thought GSG-9 were Counter Terrorist special forces kind of group. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

I think it's idiotic to pit a regional rapid-response team to a federal counter-terrorism/mobile response force; it's like trying to compare an officer of the Gendarmerie Nationale against FBI special agents. It would have made much more sense to use the FBI HRT, GIGN, or equivalent. Also, their entire method of testing is just bullcrap. I say use Simunition and a hit detection rig and let them at each other; for hand-to-hand, there are plenty of compact force detection rigs, and I'm sure that almost all of these organizations have cross-trained before.

[[Special:Contributions/70.118.116.239|70.118.116.239]]

==G36C, Season 1?==

The section of Season 1 that was about the G36C was wrong. It incorrectly labeled the gun, since it was a G36K, not a G36C. I've fixed it, but if anyone wants to inspect it to make sure I'm not just seeing things, go ahead. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 00:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

==Just Pathetic==

I was quite stoked for the new season. But when I watched the IRA vs Spetsnaz bit on the special, I noticed that when the announcer describes the G3 sniper rifle, the fucking picture beside him is a G36K! I could understand a slight mistake, but considering these are two COMPLETELY different weapons of different eras, that's plainly unacceptable. [[Special:Contributions/142.167.158.222|142.167.158.222]]

:They did the same thing with the Walther P38 and had the stat image be a Luger [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

:I believe we have now officially left the land of "Did Not Do Their Research", and have entered the realm of "They Just Didn't Care."--[[User:PistolJunkie|PistolJunkie]] 22:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

::As horrible as their firearm "tests" and the like have been so far, they just totally blew them all out of the water with the Alexander the Great vs Attila the Hun episode. They compared a one-handed Hunnic battle axe to a freaking BALLISTA! A ''melee weapon'' vs a ''siege engine''? Seriously, WTF?! That's like comparing an M9 bayonet to the 120mm main gun on an Abrams tank! [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

==Uhhh. What????==
Ok I've watched a couple episodes and I have to say this show is ........... well it's stupid. That's the only way I can describe it. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 22:00, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I think we all agree on that [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Yeah, comparing a battle axe designed for melee combat to a ballista designed to attack structures and large formations was the last straw. This show has lost all credibility. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about ya, but has Spike TV received any complaints though???

Online fan complaints are always going on [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

== I am now pissed! ==

A grenade vs a Winchester repeating rifle?! The Tommygun vs the peacemaker?! Brass Knuckles vs pistol whipping someone. And Al Capone LOSES to the cowboys?! This show never ceases to piss me off. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Man that was rigged! Besides I know more about gangster weapons compared to cowboy weapons.

It wasn't rigged they rightfully took into account that Jesse James and his boys had more experiance in marksmanship and built up speed when aligning their sights

Mobsters would most likely use a .38 snub nosed revolver of some sort while the James gang would have a mix of Remington, S&W and Colt. Also, mobsters usually shot people from behind, rarely getting into gun fights-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 21:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with the earlier comment. I believe that this was one episode where they actually made sense. The Thompson is a submachine gun but they make a valid point in that the James gang could easily outdraw a mobster and put them down before they could bring up the Thompson. The only part I didn't get was the stiletto versus the Bowie knife. More concealable? What does that have to do with anything. The Bowie is easily the more deadlier in my opinion.[[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 23:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

It's probably easier to bring to bear (a Bowie is a pretty decent chunk of steel, whereas the stiletto is the equivalent of a sharpened steel rod with a handle), but I agree, once you get it upon your enemy, they don't stand a chance. [[Special:Contributions/70.118.116.239|70.118.116.239]]

Anyone else cringe when he pistol whipped the skull with the chamber and barrel of the pistol and not the butt, hope he wasnt planning on using that gun to shoot with if he pisto whips like that - Captain Snikt

Probably put the damn thing out of lock. [[Special:Contributions/70.118.116.239|70.118.116.239]]

:::::I'm waiting for fluffy pillow versus toxic Fart.......[[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:50, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

In answer to the Pistol whipping question, that's how they used to pistol whip people, with the barrel/ cylinder area.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 05:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

In fact, the Remington Model 1858 was popular with Lawmen of the period for the simple reason that it was a solid frame compared to Colt's early models which weren't. Pistol whipping was a whole lot less harmful to a solid frame. The Peacemaker was made the same way. You would have pistol whipped them with the barrel unless you were highly proficient with the bandit shift you wouldn't want to take your finger that far away from the trigger. These were fixed sight guns so you didn't have to worry about knocking the sights out of alignment. And as they proved you weren't going to damage the guns as your head is of a much weaker material.[[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 21:01, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

== NAZI vs Vietcong ==

The gun match ups are just stupid for the NAZIs, I mean, they have the C96 for their handgun when the Luger is known for the gun of Germans or even the Walther P-38, but I understand not the P38 cause they did it already in the Yakuza episode. And no MP40? And a flamethrower? They've already done a Flamerthrower for the IRA, why another one? I guess they don't want the AK or any AK variants for the Vietcong? This was just disappointing. They don't even take into account that the Vietcong is jungle warfare vs the NAZIs SS that never had jungle warfare training. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

:You might as well stop bitching about this show's infinite stupidity, because everyone knows this show is made by mall ninjas, for mall ninjas. I can't imagine how many points my IQ dropped when I watched the IRA/Taliban match-up. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
::A bit of history for both of you. After WWII was over the French absorbed a fairly large number of German troops into their Foriegn Legion. These German trained troops were actily fighting the Viet Mihn and kicking ass. Unfortunatly for the French some reporter broke the story that the French Government were using former German troops including members of the SS. The result was a purge of the ranks of the Foreign Legion. Soon afterwards the French being...well the french started seriously getting their tail kicked. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 07:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Actually this episode impressed me the most out of all the others. The Waffen SS, as they were the descendants and conquerors of the dreaded Brownshirts, favored the Mauser C96. A lot of them liked the greater ammo capacity and armor piercing capability of the 7.63mm. The MP 28 was the first issued submachine gun as it was the first that was manufactured when they broke the Versailles treaty. As for pitting it against the MAT 49, it was a fair matchup. They would have had a lot of MAT 49's left when the French were defeated. Yes this show gets a lot of stuff wrong but they are trying to do a fantasy on a thirty minute tv show as best they can. So stop bitching so much. If you had to list the entire arsenal used by the Viet Cong, you'd be here for a while. They used everything and anything they could. The choices were good. They were supplied by the Russians which explains the TT 33 as well as the MAT 49. All in all the show is entertaining. Yes they get things wrong. What show doesn't every now and then? I think that they are getting better about things though.[[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 16:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I know they've done AKs before, but how can you picture Vietcong without an AK47? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

And wouldn't it make more sense to pit Chechen separatists or the Taliban against the Vietcong? Why do they make a point of comparing two entities in entirely different categories? Like the SWAT vs. GS9. Why would you put a regional, local response organization against a federal rapid response unit?

[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]

The same could be asked why a guy with a SAA can defeat guys with freaking Tommy GUNS!!!! 07:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Easy when one does exactly as they did. Fire first, hit first or come around the back and hit them. Just because one group had a tommy gun doesn't automatically mean he wins. Wyatt Earp said, "Fast is fine, accurate is final". He may have had the most rapid fire weapon but they proved that emptying a fifty round drum only produced one or two shots on a person. The James Gang had a higher ratio with their humble SAA's. Its oftentimes not the gun but the gunfighter that decides it. The James gang were well versed in firearms and tactics. Capone's gang was a bunch of thugs who used brute force and short ambushes to win. Capone's hits himself were pulled on unsuspecting men who had no chance to defend themselves. Jesse and Frank James fought Union regular army units face to face.[[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 00:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Only a foolish man would underestimate a SAA in a trained hand...full auto is ONLY good for cover fire. [[Spades of Columbia]]

:I'd pick a Tommy simply because it has more range, stopping power, more ammo and rapid fire. Not just in full auto, but semi auto. I'd be able to keep the guy with the six shooter down under I can flank him or short burst to control accuracy. That alone would give me an overpowering advantage against a guy with 2 SAA. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:22, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Excalibur, you would, and I would, just as a trained warrior would. But Capone's gang were not trained. The only thing they had any experience with is shooting unsuspecting men or drive by shootings. Even the most effective example of the Thompson's power was the St. Valentine's Day Massacre, though they relied on subterfuge and lined up the victims against the wall. The argument still stands. Both groups were used to standing and shooting it out. The James gang would have one being as they were the first to draw, the first to fire, and most importantly the first to hit. I would choose the Thompson over the SAA if I was going into battle. [[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 00:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Has everyone forgotten how big, heavey, and uncomfortable the tommy gun is. Jesse would have his SAA unholstered and fired before capone and anyone else trained or otherwise could even shoulder the tommy. The tommy looks cool but that is it, not easy to be accurate with and a pain to lug around. Plus a .45LC could do a hell alot more damage then a standard .45 acp. [[Spades of Columbia]]

The thompsons would be out and firing at greatter range than the SAA. Its not like youd be doing duels and quickdraws with a SMG. And seriously, grenades for longrange? Again, a thompson would be kicking ass.
-[[k9870]]

I can accept the SAA being easier to draw and more accurate, but what happens when the cowboys have to reload? They're going to get gunned down by fully-automatic SMGS [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 02:26, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Well...back to the discussion of VC vs SS, you have to consider that we are talking about 20-30+ years of weapons development, most importantly that of the assault rifle. The weapon choices for the both factions were relatively poor. Even though the Mp-28 was used, the MP-40 would have easily superseded it by the height of WWII. Furthermore, The SS would have mostly bolt action rifles like the Karabiner 98k or semi-auto rifles like the Gewehr 41 or 43. These things are loaded with stripper clips mind you, which is not a fast action like I don't know...magazines. These weapons lacked fire suppression, putting the SS at a volume of fire disadvantage. But you argue range? Well, without optics, and the WWII did not have widespread use of optics outside of snipers, your ironsights will likely hit something within 250 meters. I would've used the panzerfaust or panzershrek as my special weapon. Also consider this, the SS were especially good for executing unarmed civilians and terror tactics. During the invasion of Poland it is noted historically that the SS were too fanatical in their tactics and lost more men than they should have in their attacks. Their experience is European fighting and the beginning of urban warfare. The VC on the other hand would have a plethora of weapons of their choosing and a huge advantage over the SS due to weapon availability and choice. Not only do they get the leftover toys of the Soviets from WWII (which defeated the SS btw), they also have assault rifles. Now, the exclusive of the AK-47 or the Type 56 in the hands of the VC was simply absurd. The exclusion from the show shocked me. That gun, in all its amazingness,would destroy anything the SS could bring to bear. If you pair the SS WWII rifles to a VC SKS or a Draganov SVD, we're talking the advantage of scopes and larger magazines. Personally, I find the sub-machineguns available to either faction virtually too similar to gauge an advantage. Also, why no rpgs for the VC? RPGs were widely used by them and had larger warheads and shot hundreds of meters further than any SS equivalent, let alone their flamethrower. Think counter-tactics too: US troops in Vietnam had training based on experiences in WWII and had assault rifles, but were sadly outperformed by the VC. With their gurellia and "lấy anh ta bởi vành đai các khóa" (grab him by the belt buckle) tactics, they were able to swarm and at least debilitate the fighting ability or the fighting mentality of their enemy, and they were superb at it. So, the inferior weapons and fanatical SS tactics are going to beat the VC's superior weapons and guerrila counter-western tactics, laughable. I don't have any love for either faction, but I do like logic and stuff.
--[[Special:Contributions/108.0.97.230|108.0.97.230]] 11:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)DaiTaNam 5:12am, 9 June 2010

I think SS vs NVA would be more fair, the NVA were actually trained and disciplined more and an actual fighting unit, VC were peasants that were just thrown guns and told to go fight. The superior discipline of the SS troops would have them win even if the VC managed to have superior weapons (which i doubt they would, ive seen pictures with some aks, sks, etc, but most had like mosins or captured french weapony.

True that the VC were a group of peasants but the history of Vietnam was that of constant invasions from superpowers of several ages. Most would have been veterans against the French in the French Indochina War and with the brief fighting against the Japanese in WWII. That and the precursor to the Green Berets in WWII sent units to train the precursors of the VC called the Viet Minh. Therefore, their experience against enemies with with advantages such as air power, armored vehicles, tanks, a navy, and superior weapons was all but plenty of training for the surviving VC which they passed onto the next generation. Furthermore, the SS discipline was counter with their own fanaticism. Sure they didn't run away, but they also performed suicidal charge tactics, particularly in Poland and other theaters in Eastern Europe where they were also defeated by the conscript army of the Soviets. As for weapons provided, the VC would be equipped with French Mas rifles, Japanese weaponry, and mosin-nagants in the EARLY stages of the French Indochina War. After and into the Vietnam War, the Ho Chi Minh trail along with China's and Russia's blessing would have them thoroughly supplied. This supply began in the middle of the French Indochina War and persisted into the Vietnam war so AK's were in no short supply. Discipline is important, but the way of fighting countered the style of fighting of the SS and many years of weapons improvement, its one sided. --[[Special:Contributions/108.0.97.230|108.0.97.230]] 06:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)DaiTaNam 12:15am, 10 June 2010

== Meddellin cartel vs Somali Pirates ==

What do you think? I personally wanted the cartel to win but not every thing comes true

:The Car bomb and Machete were better then the hook and RPG, but honestly, the PKM and AK got most of the kills, and they were better than the M60 and Uzi. Honestly, the Uzi vs AK-47 was stupid to begin with, as obviously the longer ranged, more accurate and higher powered gun was going to win. Somali Pirates won fair and square. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

No one ever doubts the AK, but what whas the point of the exploding head, who can overheat their machine gun fastest competiton? - Captain Snikt

I like how the cartel had a remote bomb in their own car......

I was laughing when they had the Colombian dancing while carrying his M60 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 12:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
* "The dancing machine gunner!" was all I could say when I saw that. --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 15:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
** That whole "intro scene" for the Cartel side with that "Latino Heat" music playing plus the alternating images of the dancing M60 man and the one guy carrying nothing but a machete practicing his fighting technique(!) was some of the funniest stuff on this show. [[User:DKS01|DKS01]] 11:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

: For once, I knew going into the battle who would win. With the Somalis having the edge in firearms and the Colombians having the edge in a car bomb and machete, the outcome was clear. Fun to watch, and the Somali guys were badass and funny. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

In real life the somalis are poorly armed and high on Khat.

:I mean if the French can capture the Somali pirates, then anyone can [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that when they were introducing the Mini UZI they showed a MAC-10, any one see that? also M14fanboy, I wasn't saying the somalis wrongfuly won, its that I went in rooting for the cartel. Just so theres no miss understanding between us:)
*Yeah, I was watching the show with my dad, and I pointed out they showed a MAC instead of an Uzi. [[User:DKS01|DKS01]] 11:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:Let's be honest, the cartel aren't warriors in any sense. Murdering policemen in their homes in cold blood, killing unarmed civilians and politicians in cold blood, and trafficking cocaine does not qualify one to be a warrior. I won't say the Somalis were really warriors either, but atleast they get into actual gunfights instead of murdering innocent people. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Agreed, I just rooted for them because I like the movie Blow :)

Okay, who in their right mind would lug a PKM and/or an M60 to a gunfight? Both of these things weigh at or around twenty pounds, both could have easily replaced those with lighter machine guns. Since East-Bloc guns are a dime a dozen, the Somalis could have gone with an RPK or an RPD (more likely the RPD). Both weigh less than the PKM, and carry the same amount of rounds (okay, RPK has a 75-round drum), and the cartridges are only fifteen millimetres shorter than the PKM's, but just as lethal. As for the cartel, they could have used a Galil ARM or an early variant of the SAW, and they most likely would have gotten them from corrupt soldiers and/or policemen (not sure if the PNC has as high-quality gear as the Army) looking for a quick peso. -Any mouse

== Deadliest Warrior...riiiight ==

Okay, I've seen the discussions on this page, and it's official: Deadliest Warrior sucks. The weapons suck, the match-ups suck, and half of the winners in these match-ups would end up getting their asses blown off by the loser (Army SF vs. Spetznaz, anyone?). This is another show that's gonna entice dumbass teenagers (come August, I'm going to have to deal with them again, but I'm a senior, so hopefully this is the last time) that what's presented on that show is the real deal and they won't even bother to look up half of the crap that's presented on the show and find out the REAL truth. -Any mouse

== NO SURPRISE ==

Marketing success does not make the quality of the show. And I'm sure we can all agree that "though a person is smart, people are stupid". There are many shows that are going on forever that have no sense of intelligence, quality, or cultural/philosophical depth, but they still make massive amounts of money and continue. Also, two seasons is not a large measure of success as many shows continue for at least two seasons. It's on Spike TV at like 9 or 10 at night, what kind of people you expect to watch it? I'll let you play with that thought. Furthermore, unlike mythbusters, this show does not use any real science. Go back to your 8th grade science course, what was the first thing we learned: how to make a proper experiment. You CAN NOT take two weapons, give them different tests, and then compare them! "Oh weapon A stabs geletin better and weapon B slices pig better...uuhhhhh I think I'll chose this one because lalala reason that makes no sense. Hmm, this gun hit more targets in a shorter time but this gun does more damage...lalalal". DO THE SAME TESTS TO COMPARE! These unintelligent dimwits that run the show don't know how to make science work properly. Only the doctor guy is smart, cause he's a trauma doctor, he knows what makes death happen, though he should shut up on voting on a weapon. And the slytherin studios guy is the worse. A battlefield simulation? Go to their website and take a good look at their games and you'll see that he can't make a good simulation. On the note of Green Berets vs Spetsnaz, as an American I love America and HATE COMMIES!!! But I'd be an idiot if I believed my country was invincible. Sure we can glass 90% of the globe, but in a man for man fight, we are a bit disadvantaged. We live in a rich beautiful society that makes us weak as a tradeoff and our special forces though certainly an elite, follow under Rules of War and are precision soldiers as opposed to outright murderers like the Spetsnaz. Green Beret are special ops, Spetsnaz (if we assume that we can pull from their best due to an ambiguous name) are black ops. There is a difference level that separates the Spetsnaz from the Green Beret. A fair match-up is Navy SEALS and the Spetsnaz, now that would be great. If you want a Russian pair for the Green Beret, go with the VDV Airborne. Also, consider the weapons, M4/M16 series weapons are terrible. They jam for any reason pretty much and the lethality of the 5.56x45mm is dependent on fragmentation that doesn't always happen. Politics and economic maneuvers have kept this garbage in the American military. Notice that most NATO forces do not use the M16 but other weapons (Aug, Famas, SA80, G36)that ya know, don't jam all the time. Ak's and their variants are used globally and have proven their lethality. And for the Spetsnaz well, look up the AN-94, the OC-14, and the 9x39mm Russian cartridge. Youtube it, do your research online, you'll find the difference in weapon lethality over the m16. (I know they didn't use those weapons but I'm sure the above posters refereed to a more realistic comparison). Now if the president didn't decline the implementation of the Bushmaster ACR in American forces than we'd have a closer weapon match-up. But alas, declined due to "not wanting to give America a warlike image"...during war. That thought alone should give you a picture on the "us versus them" comparison.
-DaiTaNam--[[Special:Contributions/24.4.196.248|24.4.196.248]] 18:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Hold up, who declined the ACR, Dubya or Obama

It was Obama

*Er, I'd say that most US special forces tend to be better trained than their Russian counterparts. Go ask the Northern Aliiance. And the Specnaz aren't "black ops."

*M16 is terrible? What a joke... I'm sure the US military, the SAS/SBS, the Israeli military, the Ghurkas, the Brazilian Marine Corps, the Canadian armed forces, the Dutch armed forces, the Indonesian special forces, Polish GROM, etc. would disagree with that. But what do they know about guns?

And something must be wrong with my AR-15...it never jams. I've put over a thousand rounds through it rapidly without cleaning. No malfunctions. My friend in the USMC dragged his M16 through mud during a live fire exercise, and the weapon functioned perfectly. No malfunctions! And at 500 yards, the .223 only has as much ballistic energy as a .45 does at the muzzle. That’s barely 3X the power of a .22 magnum, and that’s at 500 yards! Up close it’s barely more energetic that a .44 magnum. Can’t we get a REAL manstopper? Anyway, any help would be appreciated. How do I get this thing to malfunction at an appropriate rate?

Yeah, mine must be broken too...I have a S&W M&P15T and have yet to have one single jam...I even shot it completely dry for a year and a half and can not make it jam. the rounds are always damn near touching too...I love my civilian M4.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 19:38, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I suppose I'll explain my comment on M16 jams. I can start that the ammunition in the M16A1 used ball gunpowder cartridges that left significant amounts residue in the barrel. And in that and later series M16's, the direct impingement system meant that combustion byproducts accumulate and condensate in the barrel, bolt, bolt carrier and receiver. Also, if submerged or substantially wet would not not work or rendered inoperable. Prolonged continuous fire (that does occur in combat) burns off essential lubricant needed to operate the gun. Using the wrong lubricant jams the weapon as well. Large temperature swings in the receiver meant damaging or destroying the spring, metal gas rings, and several other receiver parts, meaning the weapon can destroy itself. Humid environments screwed with the lubricant require to fire the weapon. Due to the numerous small parts it requires less dirt/mud to jam than other weapon platforms. The M16A1 lacked a forward assist. The M16A1 also had a forward handguard that was made of bekalite (probably spelled wrong) which could easily break or melt from prolonged fire. In an American test to find a replacement for the M16/M4, the shorter barreled M4 suffered by far the most stoppages in an extreme dust environment (about 882). So yeah, many problems with the M16 are with the A1 model but the weapon is still has many for reasons to jam than other firearms. In the recent war between Ossetia and Russia, the Ossetian army was given M16s but refused to use them in their dusty country over the AKM and the AK-74. Just because YOUR M16 was newer and well cared for, doesn't mean anything because YOU DID NOT go fight in a War environment to prove its ability to not jam. Also, the SAS also use the G36, the Israelis use the IMI Tavor or the IMI Galil, and that's only few of the many armies in the world an above poster listed that use the M16. Most NATO forces...do not. And outside of NATO, practically nobody else. And for your 5.56x45mm M855 FMJ (used by US forces). The fragmentation ability on the 5.56mm IF it fragments is super deadly, but that is a big if. Fragmentation, when it does occur, happens at depths that are thicker than the typical, malnourished American enemy. Over-penetration of flesh has been cited in Vietnam against the VC. In Somalia, many Somalis were able to continue fighting after several hits whilst being high. In shorter barreled weapons like the M4, "reliable" fragmentation muzzle velocities are not achieved. Us Americans are seeking a new round like the 6.5mm Grendel or the 6.8mm Remington to attack the very problem of the lack of stopping power of the 5.56x45mm. And the parent case, the .223, a hunter will tell you that's for killing varmints and rodents. The research is there, go take a look.
DaiTaNam --[[Special:Contributions/24.4.196.248|24.4.196.248]] 02:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Last I heard the Canadian Forces used the C7 which is a full auto M16. Last I heard the SAS used this gun aswell. Also just because other countries ues their own gun doesn't mean anything. The AUG is just used by Austria, the FAMAS is just used by france, China is the only one that uses the QBZ 95. Just because a gun is used by one country doesn't mean its bad. You really need to stop reading stuff off the internet and using future weapons as a reference about guns. You were saying how the M16 jams all the time but then corrected yourself saying it was the M16A1 when that was retired about 40 years ago making your whole argument pointless. People have kept fighting after getting hit numerous times with a .45 up close, does that mean that .45 ACP isn't big enough and everyone needs to start carrying desert eagles!? How about no lubricant? One said here about having no lube in his for over a year and a half without a jam. Please stop listening to those on the internet with little or no experiance.--[[Special:Contributions/66.30.50.180|66.30.50.180]] 14:00, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

*The SAS never have used the G36, and the Israeli phased out the Galil for the M16/M4 years ago (the Tavor is a new design being introduced, however). Wikipedia has a list of users of the M16, check it out.

I have seen this list, most of these countries received handouts of arms from the U.S. during the Cold War, revolutions and the support of anti-communist factions and whatnot, and many others do not use them as their standard rifle. Some countries are listed purely because they stole X number of m16's from the battlefield (like modern Vietnam or Cambodia). True, I leave most of my jamming grievances with the M16A1, it does not mean that the M16 later series, though better, are jam prone. Like with the 2006 Dust Test I mentioned earlier (turns out there were other dust tests that demonstrated the M16/M4 weapons jamming prone), the M4 (sharing 80% part commonality with the M16) suffered the most stoppages by far. And the American military is actively seeking a replacement to the M16 series weapons. Also, with these other users of the M16 variants and derivatives: you probably put lots of care, cleaning, and love into your M16. You take it out to ranges, shoot them, have a nice time. When I refer to jams, I refer to combat situations, which I doubt most of you do have. Real combat (as this show is "supposed" to simulate) is what I'm talking about. Of course Your's didn't jam because you didn't go to war with it, where all kinds of crazy stuff happens. This is where jams occur. And no, my information is not purely internet; I also watch documentaries like Tales of the Gun, AK-47 VS M16, Top 10 Rifles, High Impact (just to name a few); all shows on the History Channel, Discover Channel, and Military Channel all bringing historians, war veterans, and museum curators like Dr. William Atwater. There's also Time Magazine's article "Defense Under Fire". How about the US Army Natick Soldier Center presentation concerning the M4 with up to 20% reporting jamming issues. There was also a CNA Corp. survey of the US army. How about the "Baseline Reliability and Dust Assessment for the M4, M16, and M249" Army test, done by the US Army, found one jam every six rounds. But what about people in the field? Well, there's the "Project Manager Soldier’s Weapons Assessment Team’s July 31, 2003, report" detailing jamming reports from the 25th Infantry, the 82nd Airborne, 75th Ranger Regiment, and the 507th Maintenance Company to name a few. M4's (which are essentially M16A2's) as well as M16's show likeliness to jam over other weapon systems, with high reliability coming with high maintenance. Jamming is a study of the usage of a weapon in a realistic combat environment, not your local firing range. Also, on the note of other countries, the M16 came out far before weapons like the Aug and the FAMAS yet these countries didn't use them over the M16 as the Eastern Bloc countries adopted the AKM. They instead spent more many making the factories, designing the parts, and coming up with their own new weapon built around the 5.56x45mm NATO standard the US forced upon them, instead of just buying M16's.
DaiTaNam --[[Special:Contributions/24.4.196.248|24.4.196.248]] 18:50, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Like i said above, I did not clean my M4 designed firearm for over a year and a half, and i live in Montana. Very mountainess and dusty in summer, wet cold and freezing in winter and very wet spring weather with jungle like area as well as very rocky. NOT one jam in all these diffrent weathered landscapes with heavey firing...atleast two mags at a time (just enough to get that barrel really hot). When I did finally clean it i used super store brand G96 (nothing Special) in the same kind of shooting enveronment still with no jams. We got dirt here, we got mud here, we have heat and freezing temps...name any element, we have it here and i have done heavey shooting in it...with NO JAMS...I used crappy wolf ammo, i have used Hornady TAP ammo...Still no Jams. The US was looking for another combat weapon and they were going to replace the M4 with the SCAR...and they backed out because it didnt preform that much better than the M4. A gun is only as good as the operator and the ammo they put in it. Dont kill the gun with the first shot then use a second, you got 30rds in the mag...or you can wait for his buddy to come get his wounded ass and get him too.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 19:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Last I checked The military is always looking for a better weapon so they are always testing. The reason that all the soviet bloc countries use the AKM is because of a little something called COMMUNISM.--[[Special:Contributions/66.30.50.180|66.30.50.180]] 22:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
:I'm not an expert on Communism by any means, but you can maybe point me specifically to which Communist doctrine reads "Communists may only use and manufacture AKs, M16s and similar weapons are strictly forbidden"? [[User:DKS01|DKS01]] 22:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Its not forbidden but because of what the people in moscow say, all bloc countries use AK series rifles only because that is what communism is. Everyone has and uses the same.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 14:30, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
:So, if the AK is so terrible, what part of the doctrine forbids them from making a new, better weapon for "everyone to have and use the same"? I mean, it's not like they were using AKs prior to WW2, so obviously they had no problems replacing the older weapons "everyone had and used" previously. [[User:DKS01|DKS01]] 07:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I never said it was bad, where did I say that? If you notice, all of the Russian Military uses their own weapons. Do you see them running around with weapons made by other countries? --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:16, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
:The root of the discussion was that the AK was a "bad" gun. It was then said the reason the AK is used is because of "Communism", implying that the AK is indeed not a good gun and is simply used because of politics. You may not personally think it's a bad gun, but the view you were expressing was siding with those who did, even if not deliberately. And I'm not sure the point you're trying to make about the Russian military using their own weapons, as a)they could easily replace the AK with a new weapon(of their own design/manufacture, doesn't have to be imported) if they wanted, and b)the Russian military is far from the only user of AK/AK clone weapons. [[User:DKS01|DKS01]] 19:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The root of this discussion was you stating the M16 was a bad gun, not that the AK is a bad weapon. The AK is used by many other countries yes, I don't get what your trying to say there. The ComBloc countries use weapons made there they just haven't choosen a weapon to replace the AK yet because if it ain't broke don't fix it. Plus issuing new weapons and withdrawing those in service is a huge hassel that they like to avoid. It is politics. The AK series is used in the ComBloc countries because of communism because that is the gun they prefer. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 20:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Deadliest Warrior - Season 2

2010-07-12T21:00:41Z

ShootingLiberal:

==CLIP==
Why does everybody on this show, even the "experts" call the magazines "Clips." It pisses me off to no end.-[[User:SargeOverkill]]
:Because they aren't actually experts. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 08:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Shocking-[[User:SargeOverkill]]
yeah even geoff calls them clips, i like the show but acknowledge its stupidity [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 21:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

== Moving Season 1 ==

Was it really nessessary to give Season 1 it's own page? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 14:17, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

:I only moved it because it was making the page too long. Kinda like how the 24 page was divided up into seasons; the page was also getting too long. [[User:Ominae|Ominae]] 00:55, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

==Small mistakes==
As I'm watching this show, I notice way too many small errors.
For example, in Spetznaz vs. GB, they list the Makarov as 9mm. While it's true that it's 9mm, the 9X18 Makarov round is NOT the same as the 9X19.

And the Ninja's weapon, the Ninjatō, never had proof that it was real, Ninja's used Katanas. Also, the Ninja wearing black, is just a stereotype, in the woods they would wear something like green.

:I was in a class that teaches the art of Ninjutsu and even the master said that ninjas use whatever they can get their hands on. They are real special forces like [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Another mistake I noticed in the Yakuza vs Mafia episode. The Walther P38 is listed as the Yakuza sidearm of choice, but in the specs screen shown for the weapon the illustration on top is a Luger P08.

==Richard Mackowitz?==
Maybe my eyes are deceiving me, but I swear that guy firing the 416 is Mack from [[Future Weapons]]. O_o Compare these shots...
[[Image:DW PSD demo.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Steve Gordon demonstrating an HK416 by firing it at a range instead of the PSD.]]
[[Image:DW PSD angle.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Another angle of Gordon firing with the 416.]]

...to one taken from the Future Weapons page of Mack crouched over a rifle while wearing similar headgear.
[[Image:Fwm992.jpg|thumb|none|400px]]

:Well that's because both of them are bald and have the same shape of a head. It did make me glance twice [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

==Pirates vs. Knights==
That line-up was pretty laughable. Not sure who the pirate "experts" were, but they didn't know a thing they were talking about. Pirates carrying at least 4 to 6 pistols, a blunderbuss, AND grenados...yeah, no. And even going as far as to called them "trained soldiers." Pirates were poor rag-tag pillagers. Few were ever armed with more than one firearm and the chance for misfires for the flintlocks and the blunderbuss is ridiculous. Overall it would've been a sword fight and the knight's shield and sword combo with combat training would've easily taken down the pirate--no contest if the knight stayed on his horse.

--
This show is awesome, heh I hear they are going to have Green Berets vs. Spetsnaz and IRA vs. Taliban

Yeah it is awesome. I think the Spetsnaz are going to win over the Green Berets next week. I haven't heard anything about the IRA vs. Taliban fight though.

:I agree totally. Spetsnaz could kick Special Forces' ass. but dont tell any i said that! -[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]]

Whoever edited the page last is totally wrong. It should have the M4A1, AKM assault rifle, Mossberg 590, Saiga shotgun, RGD-5 grenade, M67 grenade, Beretta M9, Makarov pistol, SVD Dragunov, and M24 sniper rifle.

==Ridiculous show==
This show is ridiculous. Many of the match ups aren't fair to either or both sides, since they are just 'assuming' many things. Also many of the comparisons are purely '''apples vs oranges'''. In the Mafia versus Yakuza, comparing a Thompson to a Sten????? WTF? Two different types of guns for different purposes. the M1928 with a 100 round drum is ridiculously HEAVY and no soldier would want to be running around a lying prone with it (which is why the M1 &M1A1 with their stick mags were developed in WW2). The Sten is lighter and holds a 32 round stick mag. It was a very simplified design done for the sake of mass production during time of war, and it was much more suited to commando raids and airborne ops than the Thompson with a 100 rd drum, just because of weight and types of magazines.

Sure the historical tests of the weapons are fun and all, but all serious military historians think that the "matchups" are just stupid. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 22:12, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Dude, the Sten and the Thompson are both submachine guns for close range fighting, and no military ever used the 100 round drum. Thompsons in airborne landings used 30 round magazines that were much better than the Sten's.

:''I've seen the first episode, the Yakuza vs. Mafia matchup, and this week's Spetsnaz vs. Green Beret episode. I can't say I have a problem with the Spetsnaz "winning", but I have serious problems with the testing they did. The ballistic knife over the E-Tool was the most ridiculous thing I've seen, by far, and while I can't say I've studied Spetsnaz tactics to any real extent, I refuse to believe that they really move around like they're shooting Hard Boiled 2.'' --[[User:Clutch|Clutch]] 03:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
[[Image:SpetnazPoster.jpg|center|600px]]

::I agree, their shooting style was just...overblown. The fast crouching and ducking and shooting was just...stupid. They shoot their sidearms with one hand apparently, and got a better hit ratio over the Green Beret who shot faster and holding his M9 with both hands. The comparison wasn't as bad as the Mafia and Yakuza where they compared a P38 to a double barrel shotgun. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

::::''I have read several articles written by former police and military combat instructors which discuss how the singlehanded grip, while less effective for long range target shooting, can be much more flexible and effective than the double handed grip. Practice is far more important than which grip is used, if the Spetsnaz soldier had trained more with a one hand grip than the Green Beret did with both than he would obviously perform better. Keep in mind, handguns have been around since the 1500's and the two-handed grip did not come into widespread usage until the 1950's.''

:::''The "final fight" was even worse. I'm fairly certain that any self-respecting soldier is going to carry multiple mags for any weapon they carry into battle. Here, the Green Beret empties his M9...and drops the gun. I almost screamed at the TV, "RELOAD! RELOAD, YOU FOOL!" At least the one on one between the Yakuza and Mafia soldier seemed somewhat realistic.'' --[[User:Clutch|Clutch]] 19:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

:I know, it's like the Green Beret was thinking "Hey, I still have extra mags for my M4, but I rather use my M9. Hey, my M9 is empty, but instead of reloading, I'm going to use...my SHOVEL!" It's ridiculous. In one of the other forums, someone suggested that the show shoulda gotten the Russian and Green Beret guys in a paintball field, gave them guns that shoot sim ammo and rubber knives and have them go at it. At least that would have been more accurate results than some computer tests! [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
:::I agree that a paintball match at a combat town would show off more of their small unit tactical training, than the bullshit 'test' they do on the show. That would be interesting to see! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure you guys caught the mention of the M4A1's four-position selector *rolls eyes*... Obviously the guys they hired to portray these ex-SOF soldiers didn't do their homework. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

:It would make sense to compare ANCIENT weapons. I think there are interesting comparisons between short swords, pikes, spears and other edged weapons FROM THE ANCIENT WORLD. But when it comes to firearms, COME ON! Like someone said, they 'tested' the Yakuza versus the Mafia by testing the Walther P38(!!) to a double barrel shotgun(!!!??) WTF? How about comparing the P38 to the Model 10? or the 1911? But then the Model 10 and 1911 were also used by the Yakuza. All of the Firearms testing on this show is ridiculous and stupid. The only valid 'comparisons' are between the ancient weapons, like the Zulu short spear or the Roman sword or the Scimitar, etc. etc. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:04, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

::There were problems in comparing "ancient" weapons. I mean the Viking vs Samurai, they didn't mention that Vikings had bows and arrows too and they "tested" a viking axe to a Samurai sword! They didn't want to do the long sword vs the Katana why? I mean the samurai also used spears, but they didn't show that in the episode, just a bow vs a viking spear. Come on! The ninja vs spartan was also weak since all the weapons weren't matched up except sword against sword. Well at least for the next 2 weeks they're going back to actual warriors of old like Shaolin vs Mauoi, and 2 actual people of history Shaka Zulu vs William Wallace. But their last episode is going to be the worse, the IRA vs the Taliban! That is just..stupid. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 11:59, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
: Yeah and in Vikings .V. Samurai, the Viking snapped the Samurai's spine w/ a battle axe, but lost anyway. WTF?-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 00:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

:::''IRA versus Taliban? Despite each group being completely different philosophy/theology/motivations/goals/limitations etc, the show could just show a Bomb going off in a pub (IRA) or a truck driving UP to a marketplace and then blowing up (Taliban)....Yeeesshhhhh! MPM2008''

The only thing I've liked about this show so far was the actual ninja vs Spartan battle. It was fairly entertaining, if nothing else (even though it was a serious mismatch). Like comparing an AK to an AR hasn't been done 674356789765545675 times before...? They should stick to matching up pre-gunpowder warriors, IMO. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

:If it was Ninja vs Pirates, then that would be awesome [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

:Fuck that, i want zombies versus gladiators[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 16:55, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I just saw the Yakuza vs. Mafia & Spetznaz vs. Green Berets episodes, and I think I have a migrane now. They used a Luger P08 as a "Walther P38" and had a so-called "expert" saying the M4A1 has a "4-position selector switch" and is capable of both burst AND automatic fire. What the hell? They also had a Saiga-12 with a hunting-style stock rather than the mil-spec pistol grip. They also used a 7.62x39mm folding-stock AK to represent the 5.45x39mm "AK-74 carbine" I guess this should be expected from a channel with shows as ''Manswers''... [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 01:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

:Another glaring error; in the Green Berets/Spetznaz episode, U.S. military personnel NEVER wear berets in combat! That is PURE hollywood! Those soldiers would have been wearing kevlar helmets, patrol caps, boonie hats, or -maybe- a baseball cap, but NOT their freakin' berets which are only worn in non-combat situations such as when on base stateside. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 18:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
::The Green Berets and Navy Seals during the Vietnam War did use Berets, Bonnie hats, Bush Hats and those baseball-cap style green caps they used when they weren't in combat. Alongside all kinds of bandanas but, they depicted the green berets and the russians in modern day and even that Spike TV managed to fuck up. The Spetznaz doesn't use AKMs. They use AK-74Ms.

::Well, the were accurate enough by at least saying the Spetznaz use AK-74s, but in the show we don't see a single AK-74 like gun at all. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:37, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

:::They said AK-74 not AK-74M but that is just nitpicking. They also called the AK-74 a carbine not a assault rifle. This show is dumb.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 18:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

==Four position Safety==
I hate to break it to some of you but they do in fact make a four position safety for the M-16 series rifle. You used to be able to buy them a few years back in the Shotgun news.[[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 17:19, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
:Really? That a fact? But we're talking about the Green Berets here. Do you really think they use M4s with 4 selections? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I wouldn't know the only time I have handled an official US issue M-4A1 was about ten years ago and it was safe-Semi-Full. from what I understand the four position safety was designed as an experiment and latter sold comercially. Given that the weapons are shown comertially then it is possible that such a selector on that rifle. As far as the "Green Beret"'s go I'm sure they have an example or two stored in the back of a bunker or two. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 18:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

There was NOT any four-selector AR-15 based rifle EVER created. If you ever had any AR-15 rifle dissasembled, or even if you ever handled any, you would have know, that a four-selector switch is purely impossible. ALL issued variants have/had only a three-position selector switch - either for save/semi/auto (early models Colt 601,602, various carbine versions, the M16A3 and others) or save/semi/burst (M16A2, M16A2 etc). Concerning the M4 Carbine, the original version, Colt Model 720, adopted in 1994, was capable of firing three round burst and had M16A2 style non-remouvable carrying handle. M4A1 variant (Colt Model 925) and the SOPMOD version are capable of fully automatic fire, have remouvable carring handle, and in case of SOPMOD and M4 MWS (Modular Weapon System) are fitted with M5 Knight's Armament Corporation RIS/RAS. [[Ragnar -unregistered user]]
:Sorry idiot i am calling you on your Bullshit. Look in the back issues of Shotgun News for about the past decade. it may take a while to find comertially available four position safty's for not only the M16 but for Romanian(?) AK varients. Tey were the sorts of adds that grabbed my attention because they were the sorts of odd things that you find in places that store small arms and/or the parts of. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 22:15, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
::Adendum...(http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&S1=5760328.PN.&OS=PN/5760328&RS=PN/5760328 )Colt pattened the thing back in 1996.

This show is stupid, but It would be cool if they did Paul Kearsey VS Harry Calahan, Martin Riggs VS John Mclane, Josie wales VS Rooster Cogburn etc. At least then they would have an excuse for being so far fetched and rediculous.

==IRA Vs. Taliban==
I was kind of annoyed by the errors this show typically displays as always, but some notable ones were on Sunday with the IRA vs. Taliban episode. They claimed the Irish Republican Army used the "Armalite AR-15" as their main weapon, yet I was always under the impression they used the Armalite AR-18. And aside from that, hasn't Colt been the producer of the "AR-15" since the 70s? The guns they used on the show were M16A2/Colt AR-15 A2 HBAR rifles anyway, not Armalite guns. And they somehow tried to show the AK-47 was superior to an AR-15 by slapping a huge amount of mud on the action and pouring water down the barrel. The AK of course didn't jam and the AR did, but that's a dumb test. A gun can get dirty and jam up but if it gets THAT dirty, it isn't even a fair trial. Also, they compared an LPO-50 flamethrower to an RPG-7 (Norinco Type 69)? One is good for 20ft another can hit out at 300m. That's fair. And they claim both are MID-RANGE weapons. Also, they couldn't get the actual flamethrower used in the one incident, so they used this propane tank flamethrower that barely worked. And then they compare the slingshot to the bayonet. WTF??!! One is a hand-to-hand blade fixed to the muzzle of a gun, the slingshot is a mid-range projectile launcher. And if the IRA used it, it was more effetive than what they showed on the show. This show is dumb, I only watch it now because my friends told me it is awesome and I watch just to tear it down. Plus in the Gangsters episode, they kept saying "clip" instead of magazine, which was seriously pissing me off. And listening to David Wenham say the "British Sten uses a 30-round clip" made me want to kill everyone who makes this show. And the use of the term "drum-clip" is just insipid. There are better shows on sunday. Like Family Guy. I was mad I had to miss that just to watch this crap. Well, there's my review :) - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]

:You are right. The IRA did use AR-18s instead of AR-15s and i don't think that the IRA has a main weapon. Hell, i don't think that any guerrilla groups have main weapons. They just take what they can get, the only reason AKs are so common with guerrillas are because the Soviet Union and China gave those away like candy to enemies of the united States and because they are extremely easy to manufacture, and the use of the word clip in the show pisses me the fuck off. The computer guy also is extremely annoying. I want to shove a M67 up his ass.[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

:I agree, I mean, they even said in the show the IRA also uses AKs. The "British" troops with M16s is very inaccurate, since no one in the British military outside the SAS, SBS or other Special Forces uses M16 weapons. This is an even more insulting episode than the Green Berets vs the Spetsnaz! [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

::During the height of the IRA bombings, the British army still had the [FN FAL#L1A1|L1A1 SLR]] and Sterling SMGs. The Brits never used the M16 out side elite or non-conventional units. MPM2008
Well the British forces did have numerous AR15 type rifles in inventry for use by troops in jungle enviroments, such as Brunei and Belize. British troops from most infantry regiments could expect to do a rotation in ether country for jungle warfare training. Whilst the SLR was the most common rifle seen in Northern Ireland prior to the adoption of the SA80 series, AR15s were used there by non Spec Ops troops.

:The slingshot vs bayonet comparison definitely ties with ballistic knife vs E-tool as the absolute worst mismatches I've ever seen. And after the Luger/P-38 fiasco and those so-called "Green Berets" and "Spetznaz" making complete fools out of themselves by knowing pretty much squat about their weapons, I didn't think it could get any worse.I wonder what's next on this show. Bloods vs Crips? Rainbow Six vs Ghost Recon? Sam Fisher vs Solid Snake? Old Lady vs Pickpocket? Sheesh... When it first premiered, I really enjoyed the show, but now... [[Special:Contributions/24.7.190.251|24.7.190.251]] 03:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

:This is the LAST episode. I really HOPE there is no season 2, but if there is, I'll be there to screen cap it. And I wouldn't be surprise if it's gang bangers vs other gangs. And I'd bet on Solid Snake more than Sam Fisher and Rainbow Six over Ghost Recon. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

:No, I've got better ones: LAPD vs Blackwater and George Bush vs Barack Obama. XD [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 03:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

::Blackwater win over LAPD since the latter is a band of ex-military SF mercs, so no competition there. And if you want Bush vs Obama, just look at their presidencies and decided who wins or hope Celebrity Death match makes one. I'd say the LAPD SWAT vs the Columbian FARC. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
:::I agree that Blackwater has TONS of combat vets in their ranks. Bush versus Obama, we're not talking politics here, then '''only ONE of them had any military training, and he flew F-104 Starfighters''', so there's no comparison. So you have a 'community organizer' vs 'fighter pilot' neither one has useful small arms or hand to hand training so it's kind of a moot point. Overall the show is supremely retarded. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 05:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

:The most understated thing said so far. The show is supremely retard! Thank you [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
::The Green Berets and Spetznaz guys know absolutely jack shit about guns. and i agree with you MPM, this show is supremely retarded but it's Spike TV so what do you expect?-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 21:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

::::The Provisional IRA had both AR-15s and AR-18s, and some M16s as well. These were all weapons purchased by their Irish-American sympathizers in the U.S.; the M16s were stolen from Camp LeJune, while the AR-15s and AR-18s were purchased at gun stores. Qaddafi sent them large amounts of Communist bloc weaponry, including AKs (mostly Romanian AIMs), RPG-7s, DShKs, RGD-5 grenades, and CZ-75s. Qaddafi sent them some Western-made guns, too, including "Wonder Nines", FN MAGs, and the LPO-50s. But the IRA almost never used the LPO-50s, except in a single recorded incident at an Army checkpoint.

::::I also found it interesting that they glossed over the fact that the IRA was actually one of the very first terrorist groups in the world to use the RPG-7 (they first used RPGs as early as 1972). But anyway, I think it's a really ridiculous comparison because the IRA and the Taliban are completely different types of groups. The IRA is more of a gang than a guerrilla army, and would be squeamish if they had to engage in the sort of activities that the Taliban do regularly. Euro-commie radical wanna-bes vs. Islamist tribal mountain savages = the savages win. Not to mention that the Taliban's fund-raising practices are WAY above the IRA's. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 03:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

It funny how these people are like rrr "I am super awesome mega warrior" It is just funny how they call themselves experts. wouldn't they actually shoot each other or be arrested for terrorist activities? Beeteles

:It seems like all these experts are all assholes too that look at the opposing side as weak jerk offs [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Every time I watch this show, I end up laughing like hell, with their so called experts who keep flinching every time they fire a gun, hilarious. Also in the Spetznaz vs. Green Berets episode, the Spetznaz "sniperexpert" misses almost half of his shots, I mean WHAT THE FUCK, even I, the worst shooter in the world, could hit that target evey time with that kind of weapon, it's built for this job and he still misses. And he claims to be a former sniper, well time to work on your skills dumbass. -Jacco Croon-

== This Page ==
This Page needs alot of work. I will try to fix it later.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 19:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

:What do you mean "Alot of work"? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:38, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
::What i mean is that the screencaps need captions and some of the sections have no gun-pictures. It's more of "alot of work" as in quantity not difficulty.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 18:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Well some of the sections without gun pictures is because I didn't know which guns they were. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

== "Experts??" ==

I don't think that anyone on either side of the "Green Beret vs Spetnatz had been an "expert" for ten years or more. I meen the Green Beret was pathetic with the beretta and he had a beer belly that sticks out 20".-beeteles
:''Far be it for me to deem anyone's status at anything...I really think that the experts they get are actors who were just slightly better than the Z-list "talent" they got to do the re-enactments.'' --[[User:Clutch|Clutch]] 02:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
::I'm sure the "experts" are retarded actors that don't know a goddamm thing about guns or anything military in general.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 11:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
:::Case in point, Matt the Green Beret thinking his M4 was capable of both full auto and mechanical burst. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]]
::::And I've never met a Green Beret who actually wore his green beret into the field. -[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]]
:::::I have, but they were Nam era Green Berets.--[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 03:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

It also comes to mind that SF wouldn't typically be chosen for the type of "mission" that was portrayed in the closing battle. An op like that would normally be assigned to Rangers. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:55, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
:Really? Being not that informed or smart in shit like that,I always thought it was the enemy or situation that matterednot the operation. But again,I suck at shit like that. [[User:Pump_Shotty_Justice|Pump_Shotty_Justice]]
::Different units have different applications. SF would typically be dropped behind enemy lines to train indigenous forces and build alliances with them, while Rangers would carry out direct action missions. SF ''can'' do the latter, but they don't specialize in it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

== green beret vs spetznaz ==

well i watched the show mainly becauseit was a modern re-anacment and well...i fuckin hate this show. the so called experts were shitty shots with the beretta. the test were really un-fair. come on. mossy 590 shooting a pig from a few yards out is supposed to be a fair test to the seiga shooting about 4 different 'jelly' targets while moving and some were behind cover. a frag grenade in side a washing machine is fair compared to throwing a grenade in a plast-glass corridor. bullshit. they wouldnt really use an E-TOOL for a melee weapon the would use a K-BAR knife. they would use kinmber 1911 variants or maybe a MK23 (or is that black-ops forces). and wasnt the makarov replaced by some other gun recently (last 5-10 years or so) --[[User:Smish34|Smish34]] 15:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah the [[MP-443 Grach]]-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

:Well, Marines use KA-Bars, but many servemen use them because they are very reliable. Special Forces do use glocks and the occasional Colt, but the MK23 was phased out due to it being just overall too big of a weapon. And E-tools are extremely dangerous and quite effective when you slice something with it. -[[User:The_Winchester|Winn]]

:Couple of things I would like to point out. Yes, the Makarov is slowly being replaced by the GSh-18 pistol, which came out in 2000. I agree that the tests were incredibly unfair, though even in the shotgun test, the saiga won, even though it's test was unfair. I believe they used the E-tool as the Green Beret melee weapon because if it was just a knife against a ballistics knife, the ballistics knife would have too much of an advantage. With the E-Tool, which is still a very capable weapon, they at least have a longer reach in straight up melee combat. And no, as far as I'm aware, and this is supported by my limited research on the subject, the Green Berets would use the Beretta. The only branch that ever used/still uses a Kimber model was the MEU. [[Special:Contributions/71.199.132.177|71.199.132.177]] 19:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

should have been Delta vs Spetnaz...ahhaha just kidding, but seriously that episode pissed off a ton of people, you'd think that the Green Berets would be equiped with more customized M4s and such, and each fire team would be different. wheres the team's DMR? wheres the team's machine gunner? etc etc and i mean for both sides...and a shotgun is a secProxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0

dary weapon, never a primary when it comes to a fireteam, unless you're in SWAT or something. M9s, M11s, MEUs, etc etc, each Green Beret or Special Forces soldier has his choice of what kind of firearms he wants to carry.
overall...bullshit

do ya know what really pissedmeoff. when the spetznaz soldier threw the grenade in the washing machine he walked off and lit up a smoke like he was some badass cool soldier. very unproffesional. and made him look like a jackass. if i was on COD...hahahah just messing around im not an 8 year old--[[User:Smish34|Smish34]] 20:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

:So what? The Mafia guy put a rose into the pocket of a dummy after he mowed it down with his tommy gun. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 20:04, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Why exactly does the image comment on the Benelli M3 say that the M4 would do better? As far as I know, they are both semi-auto tubular-magazine shotguns with similar capacities; all the M4 brings to the table is its special stock, which doesn't add up to a significant advantage over a regular tactical stock unless you're talking varied terrain or engagement ranges (going from medium to CQB to short range and back again). I haven't seen this newer episode with the M3 (I only saw the one with the Remington M870 or something), but they probably used it in pump-action only (for that extra dose of bullshit).

[[Special:Contributions/70.118.116.239|70.118.116.239]]

:Actually it's a typo. I was refering to the M3, not the M4 since the M4 wasn't in the screen cap. I was saying that another semi auto would be better to compare to a semi auto shotgun like the Saiga [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:33, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Except the Benelli M3 is selective; you can switch between pump-action and semi-auto (the semi-auto has the same functionality as the Benelli M1, which is more or less the gold standard of rapid-response semi-auto shotguns; how can the Saiga, a re-purposed 12 Gauge variant of a sporter version of an AK, stack up to a purpose-built tactical shotgun?).

In all honesty, it really doesn't matter about fairness, because the whole test was rigged to begin with. We're talking about the same show that put a siege weapon against a battle axe.

[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]

==Meant for Entertainment==

I do not believe this show is meant to be taken seriously, rather it is meant for entertainment and possibly sending people into fits about whatever historical badass they were rooting for. I agree that the test ARE ridiculous, unbalanced and often seem rigged but I think the show was meant for viewing pleasure and a springboard for calm discussions rather than a reason to shout and call foul. Anybody with a brain, nay half a brain, could see that these tests and "experts" are fictitious. Hell, the "advanced system" they claim to use is MS Excel. Therefore I can only logically conclude that the show is not and never was meant to be taken seriously.By the way, the RPG-7 appears to be a a Norico copy.[[User:UH-H1|Bumblebear]]

:The RPG also seems to be a fake cause the way it was fired, it looked like special effects. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

::This would be a good show if they didn't fudge the "tests" and just pitted two very different people against each other. The problem with the show is that it's ridiculous, AND it tries to look real and scientific. Seriously, ditch the fake science, and Spike would be sitting on a f*cking goldmine. Zombies vs. Delta Force? Win. Pirates vs. ninjas? Epic win.--[[Special:Contributions/70.121.214.203|70.121.214.203]] 20:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I actually like this show, even though they may never show it in Australia, but I watched several episodes on the internet and it's interesting and ridiculously funny.

If they were going for shock value and the coolness factor, they would have used Simunition and a hit-detection rig instead of this "programmer" bullshit. Why did they throw the science in if they're going to just half-ass it? They should pack it in and just go for maximum collateral, like everything else that involves guns and Spike TV.

[[Special:Contributions/70.118.116.239|70.118.116.239]]

==Season 2==
Bad news people,there is going to be a second season. --[[Special:Contributions/66.168.55.164|66.168.55.164]] 01:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC) (ThePotShot)

So???

:What next? Delta vs Chinese special forces? LA SWAT vs Columbians? Abraham Lincoln vs Hitler? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Hey, those aren't very bad ideas. Maybe they might have them in future episodes. Also can we please cut down on the criticism because like what they said earlier this show isn't meant to be taken seriously and is rather more for entertainment.

:::I got it! MALL NINJAs versus COD Fanboys! Woo hoo! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 08:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

:No no, Mall Ninjas vs REAL ninjas and COD fanboys vs Battlefield fanboys [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

:Two new matchups- Attila the Hun v/s Alexander Great and Nazi SS v/s Viet Cong (WTF?) has been confirmed for Season 2 they are also doing jesse james gang vs al capone's too which seems a little one sided [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadliest_Warrior#cite_note-18].--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 16:39, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

::See, neither of those make sense. Attila and Alexander were better as generals then warriors, as opposed to Wallace and Zulu, who were both revered as capable fighters. The Nazi SS and the Vietcong doesn't even begin to make sense. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 02:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

According to wiki, there will be a CIA vs KGB, which is also...pretty vague. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Do you think they should do North Korean Army vs South Korean Army?

James Bond vs Jasone Bourne might be nice (Bourne wins)

Here's seaason 2's match ups,,according to Wikipedia:

SWAT vs. GSG-9: ''Ther'e both SWAT right?''

Aztec Jaguar vs. Zande Warrior ''Who's a zande?''

A Zande is essentially a north african tribal warrior... ~kinda~ like a zulu but with their own unique style of weapons

Jesse James Gang vs. Al Capone Gang ''Uhm, Thompsons vs revolvers. no contest''

Persian Immortal vs. Celt ''Ok, maybee''

Roman Centurion vs. India's Rajput Warrior

Somali Pirate vs. Medellin Cartel ''Guy with ruty AK vs guy with unlimited budget for wepons? Medellin win''

KGB vs. CIA ''What are they supposed to use?''

Vlad the Impaler vs. Sun Tzu ''Uhm, Sun was a THINKER, not a warrior, and Vlad is an overrated psycho.''

Ming Warrior vs. Musketeer

Comanche vs. Mongol

Navy Seal vs. Israeli Commandos ''Might be good''

:Ming Warrior vs. Musketeer - Musketeer has...guns. GSG-9 is German special forces. They are one of the world's first modern spec ops. They'll win. Attila the Hun v/s Alexander Great, they both had to be warriors on the field, because unlike Generals of today, back then, you have to be a good fighter to lead and these 2 live in similar times, so it's very possible. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

The Ming dynasty covers the 14th-17th century and utilized firearms as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musketeer#Musketeers_in_China. Maybe we'll see matchlock vs. flintlock? I imagine they'll bugger it up fairly badly.

Actually on the website they show "bio" pics of the ming warrior with some kind of 4 barreled handganon and the musketeer is the type from the 1600s era with a matchlock musket and plug bayonet so all and all both sides actually have "fairly primative firearms

:I have great expectations for the Navy SEALSs vs. IDF Commandos and SWAT vs. GSG-9 episode (hope the supposed experts do not spoil these two). Whereas the Jesse James vs. Al Capone, Vlad the Impaler vs. Sun Tzu and Ming Warrior vs. Musketeer episode are the most @#!*% selections and even a 8 year old can figure out the winners in the first and last one.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 04:53, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

::Personally I think the Navy SEALs vs IDF Commandos (um... ''which'' IDF Commandos? IDF has a special unit for everything from CT to cleaning the head...) is gonna turn out just as bad as SF vs Spetsnaz. They're gonna get actors who don't know crap about crap to portray their "experts" [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 07:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

:KGB versus CIA will be weird, because as far as I know they only carry handguns, so not much to compare unless we looks at document filing, penmanship, interrogation, and maybe watercooler conversations. Also, GSG-9 will @#!*% up SWAT, SS vs VC is retarded, and on the Bond thing, let's pull a Goldeneye and have "James Bond vs entire Russian army" cause we know how that works out. [[Special:Contributions/142.167.158.222|142.167.158.222]]

According to this site http://www.isayeret.com/guides/units.htm, Isreal has 31 spceal forces units. Even if only a third are commando-type units, which one fights the SEALs? Flotila 13, the IDF/Navy SEAL equivelent, is best, but who knows. --[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 00:03, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

"SS vs VC is retarded". Not so much as it actually happened. When the French started fighting the VC, they sent in the French Foreign Legion, who just cut the VC into ribbons. A journalist did some investigating, and found out that the FFL soldiers were actually former Waffen SS. There was great outrage in France and all of the ex-SS FFL were kicked out. That's when the French started losing. David.

for CIA vs KGB, isnt it possible its the SAD? (Black Ops) so they would probably be armed with a Sig or a Glock for a sidearm, and a heavily customized M4/416

== New complaints of the new season ==

:Just saw the new episode and when the GSG9 guy talked about the PSG-1, he called the mag a clip. Not once but 3 times. That just seemed out of place. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

ahahaha the VC would own the SS regardless. and that was funny when the GSG9 guys called the mag a clip, but they didnt even have a german accent...odd...LOL and why would they use a Mossberg when they have plenty of H&K shotguns...ahahahah this show is still bullshit when it comes to firearms comparision

:They're also inconsistent. During the IRA vs Taliban, they rated the AR-15 higher than the AK. But on the Back for Blood special when they pit the Spetsnaz against the IRA, they suddenly declared the AR-15 and AK to be evenly matched. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

It was funny when they mentioned the pirates and then mention the Somalis and I just laughed cause if you've been keeping up to date, the Somallis aren't having a good track record. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

:They should do Navy SEALs vs Somali pirates. They can do all their fancy "tests" and whatnot, but then when the end comes, show a short 30 second clip of SEAL snipers downing the pirates from 300 yards away from the stern section of a frigate. XD [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

well to anser Spartan198 qustition/comment it was becuse the taliban used the AK-47 and the spetnaz used the AK-74 carbine (still think it is a bull shit connclushion tho)--[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 12:11, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I dont know why i still watch this, i really enjoy the non firearm episodes, but seriously, can they sort the 'experts' out. Did anyone else notice one of the GSG9 guys faffing aroung with a winchester trech shotgun, WTF? And dont get me started on the PSW/M4/416 mark your minds up. I also didnt see the point in a non leathal ssection on a show called deadliest warrior. Deadliest. Id much rather have seen a pistol showdown the stun grenades an a wall of tasers, ok rant over. Till next week i guess - captain snikt

@Armyguy277: So? An AK74 is just an AKM chambered for the smaller cartridge. Otherwise, it's the same identical gun. FYI, no AK74s were ever used anywhere in this show. The Spetsnaz were armed with AKMs just like the Taliban were. And the AK74 isn't a carbine, it's a rifle. The carbine version of the 74 is the AKSU-74. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 09:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

In the GSG9 vs SWAT, the guys representing GSG9 weren't even GSG9 operators. One of them is a Gebirgsjäger, mountain infantryman of the Bundeswehr, who was never in the BGS/BPol. The other one, though a GSG9 combat instructor, was an instructor for hand to hand combat. The two SWAT guys on the other hand, were actual D platoon officers. The two German guys are good, but when they do the room clearing, they can't match the speed of someone who actually participate in mission or train everyday.

Also, I found the stingball grenade vs. taser shockwave comparison to be completely bogus since they are totally different class of weapon. When the German guys point out that the stingball is more maneuverable, they just use a single taser and test it on a subject and then declare taser superior. I mean WTF... For me, D platoon could do no wrong, but this show is totally unfair to the GSG9. --[[User:Wildcards|Wildcards]] 19:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, the GSG9 guys' time in the room takedown "test" seemed a bit too fast for what they actually did. I also noticed they had a particularly slow rate of fire. I know I counted at least half a second between each of the three rounds one put into that first target dummy. And I'm not too sure of their reasoning for yelling "target" loud enough that everyone in the killhouse could hear. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Also, and is it just me, but did anyone notice one of the "operators" handling a Winchester 1897? I swear I saw it at one point. Also did the LWRC PSD switch back with a standard M4A1 when they were switching between "prep" and live fire? Also I have to agree with the "comparison" of the stingball/taser shockwave. The stingball would be the more practical of the two whereas the shockwave, though cool looking, is almost impractical. Seriously if riot cops have to set that thing up before use ya think maybe the rioters will rush them before it can be deployed?

In addition the one thing I found odd, and please correct me here, is the SWAT use of lethal force. I was always under the impression that SWAT used lethal force as a last result (yes I know this was a "combat" situation) but, at their core, they are cops who prefer to arrest suspects. I refer specifically to one scene where a SWAT operator guns down a wounded GSG-9 operator. GSG-9 on the other hand is, by their very nature, supposed to do nothing but use deadly force. Rant completed [[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 02:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

:Well, GSG 9 is technically a police tactical unit too. When the situation permit, they would attempt to arrest suspect too (hence the use of non-leathal weapons such as the stingball). Just as for SWAT, when the lives of civilians or officers are threatened, SWAT officers wouldn't hesitate to use deadly force to neutralize the suspect. As for the combat simulation at the end of the episode, it was the dumbest thing I ever saw. The only amusing part for me was that the taser shockwave proved inferior to the stingball grenade in actual combat. --[[User:Wildcards|Wildcards]] 10:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I've always thought GSG-9 were Counter Terrorist special forces kind of group. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

I think it's idiotic to pit a regional rapid-response team to a federal counter-terrorism/mobile response force; it's like trying to compare an officer of the Gendarmerie Nationale against FBI special agents. It would have made much more sense to use the FBI HRT, GIGN, or equivalent. Also, their entire method of testing is just bullcrap. I say use Simunition and a hit detection rig and let them at each other; for hand-to-hand, there are plenty of compact force detection rigs, and I'm sure that almost all of these organizations have cross-trained before.

[[Special:Contributions/70.118.116.239|70.118.116.239]]

==G36C, Season 1?==

The section of Season 1 that was about the G36C was wrong. It incorrectly labeled the gun, since it was a G36K, not a G36C. I've fixed it, but if anyone wants to inspect it to make sure I'm not just seeing things, go ahead. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 00:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

==Just Pathetic==

I was quite stoked for the new season. But when I watched the IRA vs Spetsnaz bit on the special, I noticed that when the announcer describes the G3 sniper rifle, the fucking picture beside him is a G36K! I could understand a slight mistake, but considering these are two COMPLETELY different weapons of different eras, that's plainly unacceptable. [[Special:Contributions/142.167.158.222|142.167.158.222]]

:They did the same thing with the Walther P38 and had the stat image be a Luger [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

:I believe we have now officially left the land of "Did Not Do Their Research", and have entered the realm of "They Just Didn't Care."--[[User:PistolJunkie|PistolJunkie]] 22:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

::As horrible as their firearm "tests" and the like have been so far, they just totally blew them all out of the water with the Alexander the Great vs Attila the Hun episode. They compared a one-handed Hunnic battle axe to a freaking BALLISTA! A ''melee weapon'' vs a ''siege engine''? Seriously, WTF?! That's like comparing an M9 bayonet to the 120mm main gun on an Abrams tank! [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

==Uhhh. What????==
Ok I've watched a couple episodes and I have to say this show is ........... well it's stupid. That's the only way I can describe it. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 22:00, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I think we all agree on that [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Yeah, comparing a battle axe designed for melee combat to a ballista designed to attack structures and large formations was the last straw. This show has lost all credibility. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about ya, but has Spike TV received any complaints though???

Online fan complaints are always going on [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

== I am now pissed! ==

A grenade vs a Winchester repeating rifle?! The Tommygun vs the peacemaker?! Brass Knuckles vs pistol whipping someone. And Al Capone LOSES to the cowboys?! This show never ceases to piss me off. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]

Man that was rigged! Besides I know more about gangster weapons compared to cowboy weapons.

It wasn't rigged they rightfully took into account that Jesse James and his boys had more experiance in marksmanship and built up speed when aligning their sights

Mobsters would most likely use a .38 snub nosed revolver of some sort while the James gang would have a mix of Remington, S&W and Colt. Also, mobsters usually shot people from behind, rarely getting into gun fights-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 21:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with the earlier comment. I believe that this was one episode where they actually made sense. The Thompson is a submachine gun but they make a valid point in that the James gang could easily outdraw a mobster and put them down before they could bring up the Thompson. The only part I didn't get was the stiletto versus the Bowie knife. More concealable? What does that have to do with anything. The Bowie is easily the more deadlier in my opinion.[[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 23:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

It's probably easier to bring to bear (a Bowie is a pretty decent chunk of steel, whereas the stiletto is the equivalent of a sharpened steel rod with a handle), but I agree, once you get it upon your enemy, they don't stand a chance. [[Special:Contributions/70.118.116.239|70.118.116.239]]

Anyone else cringe when he pistol whipped the skull with the chamber and barrel of the pistol and not the butt, hope he wasnt planning on using that gun to shoot with if he pisto whips like that - Captain Snikt

Probably put the damn thing out of lock. [[Special:Contributions/70.118.116.239|70.118.116.239]]

:::::I'm waiting for fluffy pillow versus toxic Fart.......[[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:50, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

In answer to the Pistol whipping question, that's how they used to pistol whip people, with the barrel/ cylinder area.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 05:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

In fact, the Remington Model 1858 was popular with Lawmen of the period for the simple reason that it was a solid frame compared to Colt's early models which weren't. Pistol whipping was a whole lot less harmful to a solid frame. The Peacemaker was made the same way. You would have pistol whipped them with the barrel unless you were highly proficient with the bandit shift you wouldn't want to take your finger that far away from the trigger. These were fixed sight guns so you didn't have to worry about knocking the sights out of alignment. And as they proved you weren't going to damage the guns as your head is of a much weaker material.[[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 21:01, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

== NAZI vs Vietcong ==

The gun match ups are just stupid for the NAZIs, I mean, they have the C96 for their handgun when the Luger is known for the gun of Germans or even the Walther P-38, but I understand not the P38 cause they did it already in the Yakuza episode. And no MP40? And a flamethrower? They've already done a Flamerthrower for the IRA, why another one? I guess they don't want the AK or any AK variants for the Vietcong? This was just disappointing. They don't even take into account that the Vietcong is jungle warfare vs the NAZIs SS that never had jungle warfare training. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

:You might as well stop bitching about this show's infinite stupidity, because everyone knows this show is made by mall ninjas, for mall ninjas. I can't imagine how many points my IQ dropped when I watched the IRA/Taliban match-up. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
::A bit of history for both of you. After WWII was over the French absorbed a fairly large number of German troops into their Foriegn Legion. These German trained troops were actily fighting the Viet Mihn and kicking ass. Unfortunatly for the French some reporter broke the story that the French Government were using former German troops including members of the SS. The result was a purge of the ranks of the Foreign Legion. Soon afterwards the French being...well the french started seriously getting their tail kicked. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 07:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Actually this episode impressed me the most out of all the others. The Waffen SS, as they were the descendants and conquerors of the dreaded Brownshirts, favored the Mauser C96. A lot of them liked the greater ammo capacity and armor piercing capability of the 7.63mm. The MP 28 was the first issued submachine gun as it was the first that was manufactured when they broke the Versailles treaty. As for pitting it against the MAT 49, it was a fair matchup. They would have had a lot of MAT 49's left when the French were defeated. Yes this show gets a lot of stuff wrong but they are trying to do a fantasy on a thirty minute tv show as best they can. So stop bitching so much. If you had to list the entire arsenal used by the Viet Cong, you'd be here for a while. They used everything and anything they could. The choices were good. They were supplied by the Russians which explains the TT 33 as well as the MAT 49. All in all the show is entertaining. Yes they get things wrong. What show doesn't every now and then? I think that they are getting better about things though.[[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 16:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I know they've done AKs before, but how can you picture Vietcong without an AK47? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

And wouldn't it make more sense to pit Chechen separatists or the Taliban against the Vietcong? Why do they make a point of comparing two entities in entirely different categories? Like the SWAT vs. GS9. Why would you put a regional, local response organization against a federal rapid response unit?

[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]

The same could be asked why a guy with a SAA can defeat guys with freaking Tommy GUNS!!!! 07:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Easy when one does exactly as they did. Fire first, hit first or come around the back and hit them. Just because one group had a tommy gun doesn't automatically mean he wins. Wyatt Earp said, "Fast is fine, accurate is final". He may have had the most rapid fire weapon but they proved that emptying a fifty round drum only produced one or two shots on a person. The James Gang had a higher ratio with their humble SAA's. Its oftentimes not the gun but the gunfighter that decides it. The James gang were well versed in firearms and tactics. Capone's gang was a bunch of thugs who used brute force and short ambushes to win. Capone's hits himself were pulled on unsuspecting men who had no chance to defend themselves. Jesse and Frank James fought Union regular army units face to face.[[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 00:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Only a foolish man would underestimate a SAA in a trained hand...full auto is ONLY good for cover fire. [[Spades of Columbia]]

:I'd pick a Tommy simply because it has more range, stopping power, more ammo and rapid fire. Not just in full auto, but semi auto. I'd be able to keep the guy with the six shooter down under I can flank him or short burst to control accuracy. That alone would give me an overpowering advantage against a guy with 2 SAA. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:22, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Excalibur, you would, and I would, just as a trained warrior would. But Capone's gang were not trained. The only thing they had any experience with is shooting unsuspecting men or drive by shootings. Even the most effective example of the Thompson's power was the St. Valentine's Day Massacre, though they relied on subterfuge and lined up the victims against the wall. The argument still stands. Both groups were used to standing and shooting it out. The James gang would have one being as they were the first to draw, the first to fire, and most importantly the first to hit. I would choose the Thompson over the SAA if I was going into battle. [[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 00:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Has everyone forgotten how big, heavey, and uncomfortable the tommy gun is. Jesse would have his SAA unholstered and fired before capone and anyone else trained or otherwise could even shoulder the tommy. The tommy looks cool but that is it, not easy to be accurate with and a pain to lug around. Plus a .45LC could do a hell alot more damage then a standard .45 acp. [[Spades of Columbia]]

The thompsons would be out and firing at greatter range than the SAA. Its not like youd be doing duels and quickdraws with a SMG. And seriously, grenades for longrange? Again, a thompson would be kicking ass.
-[[k9870]]

I can accept the SAA being easier to draw and more accurate, but what happens when the cowboys have to reload? They're going to get gunned down by fully-automatic SMGS [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 02:26, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Well...back to the discussion of VC vs SS, you have to consider that we are talking about 20-30+ years of weapons development, most importantly that of the assault rifle. The weapon choices for the both factions were relatively poor. Even though the Mp-28 was used, the MP-40 would have easily superseded it by the height of WWII. Furthermore, The SS would have mostly bolt action rifles like the Karabiner 98k or semi-auto rifles like the Gewehr 41 or 43. These things are loaded with stripper clips mind you, which is not a fast action like I don't know...magazines. These weapons lacked fire suppression, putting the SS at a volume of fire disadvantage. But you argue range? Well, without optics, and the WWII did not have widespread use of optics outside of snipers, your ironsights will likely hit something within 250 meters. I would've used the panzerfaust or panzershrek as my special weapon. Also consider this, the SS were especially good for executing unarmed civilians and terror tactics. During the invasion of Poland it is noted historically that the SS were too fanatical in their tactics and lost more men than they should have in their attacks. Their experience is European fighting and the beginning of urban warfare. The VC on the other hand would have a plethora of weapons of their choosing and a huge advantage over the SS due to weapon availability and choice. Not only do they get the leftover toys of the Soviets from WWII (which defeated the SS btw), they also have assault rifles. Now, the exclusive of the AK-47 or the Type 56 in the hands of the VC was simply absurd. The exclusion from the show shocked me. That gun, in all its amazingness,would destroy anything the SS could bring to bear. If you pair the SS WWII rifles to a VC SKS or a Draganov SVD, we're talking the advantage of scopes and larger magazines. Personally, I find the sub-machineguns available to either faction virtually too similar to gauge an advantage. Also, why no rpgs for the VC? RPGs were widely used by them and had larger warheads and shot hundreds of meters further than any SS equivalent, let alone their flamethrower. Think counter-tactics too: US troops in Vietnam had training based on experiences in WWII and had assault rifles, but were sadly outperformed by the VC. With their gurellia and "lấy anh ta bởi vành đai các khóa" (grab him by the belt buckle) tactics, they were able to swarm and at least debilitate the fighting ability or the fighting mentality of their enemy, and they were superb at it. So, the inferior weapons and fanatical SS tactics are going to beat the VC's superior weapons and guerrila counter-western tactics, laughable. I don't have any love for either faction, but I do like logic and stuff.
--[[Special:Contributions/108.0.97.230|108.0.97.230]] 11:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)DaiTaNam 5:12am, 9 June 2010

I think SS vs NVA would be more fair, the NVA were actually trained and disciplined more and an actual fighting unit, VC were peasants that were just thrown guns and told to go fight. The superior discipline of the SS troops would have them win even if the VC managed to have superior weapons (which i doubt they would, ive seen pictures with some aks, sks, etc, but most had like mosins or captured french weapony.

True that the VC were a group of peasants but the history of Vietnam was that of constant invasions from superpowers of several ages. Most would have been veterans against the French in the French Indochina War and with the brief fighting against the Japanese in WWII. That and the precursor to the Green Berets in WWII sent units to train the precursors of the VC called the Viet Minh. Therefore, their experience against enemies with with advantages such as air power, armored vehicles, tanks, a navy, and superior weapons was all but plenty of training for the surviving VC which they passed onto the next generation. Furthermore, the SS discipline was counter with their own fanaticism. Sure they didn't run away, but they also performed suicidal charge tactics, particularly in Poland and other theaters in Eastern Europe where they were also defeated by the conscript army of the Soviets. As for weapons provided, the VC would be equipped with French Mas rifles, Japanese weaponry, and mosin-nagants in the EARLY stages of the French Indochina War. After and into the Vietnam War, the Ho Chi Minh trail along with China's and Russia's blessing would have them thoroughly supplied. This supply began in the middle of the French Indochina War and persisted into the Vietnam war so AK's were in no short supply. Discipline is important, but the way of fighting countered the style of fighting of the SS and many years of weapons improvement, its one sided. --[[Special:Contributions/108.0.97.230|108.0.97.230]] 06:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)DaiTaNam 12:15am, 10 June 2010

== Meddellin cartel vs Somali Pirates ==

What do you think? I personally wanted the cartel to win but not every thing comes true

:The Car bomb and Machete were better then the hook and RPG, but honestly, the PKM and AK got most of the kills, and they were better than the M60 and Uzi. Honestly, the Uzi vs AK-47 was stupid to begin with, as obviously the longer ranged, more accurate and higher powered gun was going to win. Somali Pirates won fair and square. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

No one ever doubts the AK, but what whas the point of the exploding head, who can overheat their machine gun fastest competiton? - Captain Snikt

I like how the cartel had a remote bomb in their own car......

I was laughing when they had the Colombian dancing while carrying his M60 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 12:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
* "The dancing machine gunner!" was all I could say when I saw that. --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 15:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
** That whole "intro scene" for the Cartel side with that "Latino Heat" music playing plus the alternating images of the dancing M60 man and the one guy carrying nothing but a machete practicing his fighting technique(!) was some of the funniest stuff on this show. [[User:DKS01|DKS01]] 11:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

: For once, I knew going into the battle who would win. With the Somalis having the edge in firearms and the Colombians having the edge in a car bomb and machete, the outcome was clear. Fun to watch, and the Somali guys were badass and funny. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

In real life the somalis are poorly armed and high on Khat.

:I mean if the French can capture the Somali pirates, then anyone can [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that when they were introducing the Mini UZI they showed a MAC-10, any one see that? also M14fanboy, I wasn't saying the somalis wrongfuly won, its that I went in rooting for the cartel. Just so theres no miss understanding between us:)
*Yeah, I was watching the show with my dad, and I pointed out they showed a MAC instead of an Uzi. [[User:DKS01|DKS01]] 11:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:Let's be honest, the cartel aren't warriors in any sense. Murdering policemen in their homes in cold blood, killing unarmed civilians and politicians in cold blood, and trafficking cocaine does not qualify one to be a warrior. I won't say the Somalis were really warriors either, but atleast they get into actual gunfights instead of murdering innocent people. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Agreed, I just rooted for them because I like the movie Blow :)

Okay, who in their right mind would lug a PKM and/or an M60 to a gunfight? Both of these things weigh at or around twenty pounds, both could have easily replaced those with lighter machine guns. Since East-Bloc guns are a dime a dozen, the Somalis could have gone with an RPK or an RPD (more likely the RPD). Both weigh less than the PKM, and carry the same amount of rounds (okay, RPK has a 75-round drum), and the cartridges are only fifteen millimetres shorter than the PKM's, but just as lethal. As for the cartel, they could have used a Galil ARM or an early variant of the SAW, and they most likely would have gotten them from corrupt soldiers and/or policemen (not sure if the PNC has as high-quality gear as the Army) looking for a quick peso. -Any mouse

== Deadliest Warrior...riiiight ==

Okay, I've seen the discussions on this page, and it's official: Deadliest Warrior sucks. The weapons suck, the match-ups suck, and half of the winners in these match-ups would end up getting their asses blown off by the loser (Army SF vs. Spetznaz, anyone?). This is another show that's gonna entice dumbass teenagers (come August, I'm going to have to deal with them again, but I'm a senior, so hopefully this is the last time) that what's presented on that show is the real deal and they won't even bother to look up half of the crap that's presented on the show and find out the REAL truth. -Any mouse

== NO SURPRISE ==

Marketing success does not make the quality of the show. And I'm sure we can all agree that "though a person is smart, people are stupid". There are many shows that are going on forever that have no sense of intelligence, quality, or cultural/philosophical depth, but they still make massive amounts of money and continue. Also, two seasons is not a large measure of success as many shows continue for at least two seasons. It's on Spike TV at like 9 or 10 at night, what kind of people you expect to watch it? I'll let you play with that thought. Furthermore, unlike mythbusters, this show does not use any real science. Go back to your 8th grade science course, what was the first thing we learned: how to make a proper experiment. You CAN NOT take two weapons, give them different tests, and then compare them! "Oh weapon A stabs geletin better and weapon B slices pig better...uuhhhhh I think I'll chose this one because lalala reason that makes no sense. Hmm, this gun hit more targets in a shorter time but this gun does more damage...lalalal". DO THE SAME TESTS TO COMPARE! These unintelligent dimwits that run the show don't know how to make science work properly. Only the doctor guy is smart, cause he's a trauma doctor, he knows what makes death happen, though he should shut up on voting on a weapon. And the slytherin studios guy is the worse. A battlefield simulation? Go to their website and take a good look at their games and you'll see that he can't make a good simulation. On the note of Green Berets vs Spetsnaz, as an American I love America and HATE COMMIES!!! But I'd be an idiot if I believed my country was invincible. Sure we can glass 90% of the globe, but in a man for man fight, we are a bit disadvantaged. We live in a rich beautiful society that makes us weak as a tradeoff and our special forces though certainly an elite, follow under Rules of War and are precision soldiers as opposed to outright murderers like the Spetsnaz. Green Beret are special ops, Spetsnaz (if we assume that we can pull from their best due to an ambiguous name) are black ops. There is a difference level that separates the Spetsnaz from the Green Beret. A fair match-up is Navy SEALS and the Spetsnaz, now that would be great. If you want a Russian pair for the Green Beret, go with the VDV Airborne. Also, consider the weapons, M4/M16 series weapons are terrible. They jam for any reason pretty much and the lethality of the 5.56x45mm is dependent on fragmentation that doesn't always happen. Politics and economic maneuvers have kept this garbage in the American military. Notice that most NATO forces do not use the M16 but other weapons (Aug, Famas, SA80, G36)that ya know, don't jam all the time. Ak's and their variants are used globally and have proven their lethality. And for the Spetsnaz well, look up the AN-94, the OC-14, and the 9x39mm Russian cartridge. Youtube it, do your research online, you'll find the difference in weapon lethality over the m16. (I know they didn't use those weapons but I'm sure the above posters refereed to a more realistic comparison). Now if the president didn't decline the implementation of the Bushmaster ACR in American forces than we'd have a closer weapon match-up. But alas, declined due to "not wanting to give America a warlike image"...during war. That thought alone should give you a picture on the "us versus them" comparison.
-DaiTaNam--[[Special:Contributions/24.4.196.248|24.4.196.248]] 18:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Hold up, who declined the ACR, Dubya or Obama

It was Obama

*Er, I'd say that most US special forces tend to be better trained than their Russian counterparts. Go ask the Northern Aliiance. And the Specnaz aren't "black ops."

*M16 is terrible? What a joke... I'm sure the US military, the SAS/SBS, the Israeli military, the Ghurkas, the Brazilian Marine Corps, the Canadian armed forces, the Dutch armed forces, the Indonesian special forces, Polish GROM, etc. would disagree with that. But what do they know about guns?

And something must be wrong with my AR-15...it never jams. I've put over a thousand rounds through it rapidly without cleaning. No malfunctions. My friend in the USMC dragged his M16 through mud during a live fire exercise, and the weapon functioned perfectly. No malfunctions! And at 500 yards, the .223 only has as much ballistic energy as a .45 does at the muzzle. That’s barely 3X the power of a .22 magnum, and that’s at 500 yards! Up close it’s barely more energetic that a .44 magnum. Can’t we get a REAL manstopper? Anyway, any help would be appreciated. How do I get this thing to malfunction at an appropriate rate?

Yeah, mine must be broken too...I have a S&W M&P15T and have yet to have one single jam...I even shot it completely dry for a year and a half and can not make it jam. the rounds are always damn near touching too...I love my civilian M4.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 19:38, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I suppose I'll explain my comment on M16 jams. I can start that the ammunition in the M16A1 used ball gunpowder cartridges that left significant amounts residue in the barrel. And in that and later series M16's, the direct impingement system meant that combustion byproducts accumulate and condensate in the barrel, bolt, bolt carrier and receiver. Also, if submerged or substantially wet would not not work or rendered inoperable. Prolonged continuous fire (that does occur in combat) burns off essential lubricant needed to operate the gun. Using the wrong lubricant jams the weapon as well. Large temperature swings in the receiver meant damaging or destroying the spring, metal gas rings, and several other receiver parts, meaning the weapon can destroy itself. Humid environments screwed with the lubricant require to fire the weapon. Due to the numerous small parts it requires less dirt/mud to jam than other weapon platforms. The M16A1 lacked a forward assist. The M16A1 also had a forward handguard that was made of bekalite (probably spelled wrong) which could easily break or melt from prolonged fire. In an American test to find a replacement for the M16/M4, the shorter barreled M4 suffered by far the most stoppages in an extreme dust environment (about 882). So yeah, many problems with the M16 are with the A1 model but the weapon is still has many for reasons to jam than other firearms. In the recent war between Ossetia and Russia, the Ossetian army was given M16s but refused to use them in their dusty country over the AKM and the AK-74. Just because YOUR M16 was newer and well cared for, doesn't mean anything because YOU DID NOT go fight in a War environment to prove its ability to not jam. Also, the SAS also use the G36, the Israelis use the IMI Tavor or the IMI Galil, and that's only few of the many armies in the world an above poster listed that use the M16. Most NATO forces...do not. And outside of NATO, practically nobody else. And for your 5.56x45mm M855 FMJ (used by US forces). The fragmentation ability on the 5.56mm IF it fragments is super deadly, but that is a big if. Fragmentation, when it does occur, happens at depths that are thicker than the typical, malnourished American enemy. Over-penetration of flesh has been cited in Vietnam against the VC. In Somalia, many Somalis were able to continue fighting after several hits whilst being high. In shorter barreled weapons like the M4, "reliable" fragmentation muzzle velocities are not achieved. Us Americans are seeking a new round like the 6.5mm Grendel or the 6.8mm Remington to attack the very problem of the lack of stopping power of the 5.56x45mm. And the parent case, the .223, a hunter will tell you that's for killing varmints and rodents. The research is there, go take a look.
DaiTaNam --[[Special:Contributions/24.4.196.248|24.4.196.248]] 02:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Last I heard the Canadian Forces used the C7 which is a full auto M16. Last I heard the SAS used this gun aswell. Also just because other countries ues their own gun doesn't mean anything. The AUG is just used by Austria, the FAMAS is just used by france, China is the only one that uses the QBZ 95. Just because a gun is used by one country doesn't mean its bad. You really need to stop reading stuff off the internet and using future weapons as a reference about guns. You were saying how the M16 jams all the time but then corrected yourself saying it was the M16A1 when that was retired about 40 years ago making your whole argument pointless. People have kept fighting after getting hit numerous times with a .45 up close, does that mean that .45 ACP isn't big enough and everyone needs to start carrying desert eagles!? How about no lubricant? One said here about having no lube in his for over a year and a half without a jam. Please stop listening to those on the internet with little or no experiance.--[[Special:Contributions/66.30.50.180|66.30.50.180]] 14:00, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

*The SAS never have used the G36, and the Israeli phased out the Galil for the M16/M4 years ago (the Tavor is a new design being introduced, however). Wikipedia has a list of users of the M16, check it out.

I have seen this list, most of these countries received handouts of arms from the U.S. during the Cold War, revolutions and the support of anti-communist factions and whatnot, and many others do not use them as their standard rifle. Some countries are listed purely because they stole X number of m16's from the battlefield (like modern Vietnam or Cambodia). True, I leave most of my jamming grievances with the M16A1, it does not mean that the M16 later series, though better, are jam prone. Like with the 2006 Dust Test I mentioned earlier (turns out there were other dust tests that demonstrated the M16/M4 weapons jamming prone), the M4 (sharing 80% part commonality with the M16) suffered the most stoppages by far. And the American military is actively seeking a replacement to the M16 series weapons. Also, with these other users of the M16 variants and derivatives: you probably put lots of care, cleaning, and love into your M16. You take it out to ranges, shoot them, have a nice time. When I refer to jams, I refer to combat situations, which I doubt most of you do have. Real combat (as this show is "supposed" to simulate) is what I'm talking about. Of course Your's didn't jam because you didn't go to war with it, where all kinds of crazy stuff happens. This is where jams occur. And no, my information is not purely internet; I also watch documentaries like Tales of the Gun, AK-47 VS M16, Top 10 Rifles, High Impact (just to name a few); all shows on the History Channel, Discover Channel, and Military Channel all bringing historians, war veterans, and museum curators like Dr. William Atwater. There's also Time Magazine's article "Defense Under Fire". How about the US Army Natick Soldier Center presentation concerning the M4 with up to 20% reporting jamming issues. There was also a CNA Corp. survey of the US army. How about the "Baseline Reliability and Dust Assessment for the M4, M16, and M249" Army test, done by the US Army, found one jam every six rounds. But what about people in the field? Well, there's the "Project Manager Soldier’s Weapons Assessment Team’s July 31, 2003, report" detailing jamming reports from the 25th Infantry, the 82nd Airborne, 75th Ranger Regiment, and the 507th Maintenance Company to name a few. M4's (which are essentially M16A2's) as well as M16's show likeliness to jam over other weapon systems, with high reliability coming with high maintenance. Jamming is a study of the usage of a weapon in a realistic combat environment, not your local firing range. Also, on the note of other countries, the M16 came out far before weapons like the Aug and the FAMAS yet these countries didn't use them over the M16 as the Eastern Bloc countries adopted the AKM. They instead spent more many making the factories, designing the parts, and coming up with their own new weapon built around the 5.56x45mm NATO standard the US forced upon them, instead of just buying M16's.
DaiTaNam --[[Special:Contributions/24.4.196.248|24.4.196.248]] 18:50, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Like i said above, I did not clean my M4 designed firearm for over a year and a half, and i live in Montana. Very mountainess and dusty in summer, wet cold and freezing in winter and very wet spring weather with jungle like area as well as very rocky. NOT one jam in all these diffrent weathered landscapes with heavey firing...atleast two mags at a time (just enough to get that barrel really hot). When I did finally clean it i used super store brand G96 (nothing Special) in the same kind of shooting enveronment still with no jams. We got dirt here, we got mud here, we have heat and freezing temps...name any element, we have it here and i have done heavey shooting in it...with NO JAMS...I used crappy wolf ammo, i have used Hornady TAP ammo...Still no Jams. The US was looking for another combat weapon and they were going to replace the M4 with the SCAR...and they backed out because it didnt preform that much better than the M4. A gun is only as good as the operator and the ammo they put in it. Dont kill the gun with the first shot then use a second, you got 30rds in the mag...or you can wait for his buddy to come get his wounded ass and get him too.--[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 19:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Last I checked The military is always looking for a better weapon so they are always testing. The reason that all the soviet bloc countries use the AKM is because of a little something called COMMUNISM.--[[Special:Contributions/66.30.50.180|66.30.50.180]] 22:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
:I'm not an expert on Communism by any means, but you can maybe point me specifically to which Communist doctrine reads "Communists may only use and manufacture AKs, M16s and similar weapons are strictly forbidden"? [[User:DKS01|DKS01]] 22:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Its not forbidden but because of what the people in moscow say, all bloc countries use AK series rifles only because that is what communism is. Everyone has and uses the same.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 14:30, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
:So, if the AK is so terrible, what part of the doctrine forbids them from making a new, better weapon for "everyone to have and use the same"? I mean, it's not like they were using AKs prior to WW2, so obviously they had no problems replacing the older weapons "everyone had and used" previously. [[User:DKS01|DKS01]] 07:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I never said it was bad, where did I say that? If you notice, all of the Russian Military uses their own weapons. Do you see them running around with weapons made by other countries? --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:16, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
:The root of the discussion was that the AK was a "bad" gun. It was then said the reason the AK is used is because of "Communism", implying that the AK is indeed not a good gun and is simply used because of politics. You may not personally think it's a bad gun, but the view you were expressing was siding with those who did, even if not deliberately. And I'm not sure the point you're trying to make about the Russian military using their own weapons, as a)they could easily replace the AK with a new weapon(of their own design/manufacture, doesn't have to be imported) if they wanted, and b)the Russian military is far from the only user of AK/AK clone weapons. [[User:DKS01|DKS01]] 19:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The root of this discussion was you stating the M16 was a bad gun, not that the AK is a bad weapon. The AK is used by many other countries yes, I don't get what your trying to say there. The ComBloc countries use weapons made there they just haven't choosen a weapon to replace the AK yet because if it ain't broke don't fix it. Plus issuing new weapons and withdrawing those in service is a huge hassel that they like to avoid. It is politics. The AK series is used in the ComBloc countries because of communism because that is the gun they prefer. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 20:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The Hitman

2010-07-12T18:11:48Z

ShootingLiberal:

Talk:The Hitman

2010-07-12T18:10:14Z

ShootingLiberal:

The unknown AK is, I think, an AMD-65. [[User:Jimmoy|Jimmoy]] 10:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I think that those MP5's are actually HK94's as well [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 17:31, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
:At least some of them are. From what I can see, none of them have barrel lugs or paddle releases for the magazines. [[User:Ramell|Ramell]] 18:08, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that is what I noticed [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 18:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:The Hitman

2010-07-12T17:31:32Z

ShootingLiberal:

Talk:The Hitman

2010-07-12T17:31:13Z

ShootingLiberal:

The unknown AK is, I think, an AMD-65. [[User:Jimmoy|Jimmoy]] 10:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I think that those MP5's are actually HK94's as well four~

Talk:The Hitman

2010-07-12T17:30:45Z

ShootingLiberal:

The unknown AK is, I think, an AMD-65. [[User:Jimmoy|Jimmoy]] 10:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I think that those MP5's are actually HK94's as well

Talk:Colbert Report, The

2010-07-12T16:20:56Z

ShootingLiberal: /* */

How ironic we have a page for a left wing antigun jerk like Colbert on IMFDB :)
:And say what you will about Colbert, but at least he's not a hypocrite. Look at how much space we've devoted to Sylvester Stallone. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

what exactly makes him a jerk? Just because he's not a conservative gun nut?

We better put some kind of disclaimer on the page, since we're all humorless right wing gun nuts and any illusion of this being any kind of impartial catalog of weapons in film and television went out the fucking window a long time ago.

- Yeah, sure. Why not? :b [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 00:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::Yeah, ironic that a couple of anonymous douchbags [[User:69.152.170.239]] and [[User:70.111.177.84]] spout anti gun left wing sarcasm. Nice to know that the rest of us are "fascists" in your eyes. I wonder why those gun hating folks even POST HERE! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

:::Name anything I've said that's "anti-gun." You're just ranting and raving about things that have no bearing on reality. And the way you guys go on about the conspiracies of liberals and "the left" to come take your guns away is embarassing, and nothing to do with me. I'm only anti-raving hypocrite who pretends to run an impartial encyclopedia. --[[User:TheSouthpawOutlaw|TheSouthpawOutlaw]] 23:46, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I love guns. I'm a firm supporter of the second ammendment. The only catch is that I'm also a proud liberal, atheist, pro gay marriage and all of the other stuff. Just because I don't preach from the bible of Beck and Limbaugh doesn't mean I'm a communist-socialist-facsist-or any other scary sounding word ending in "ist". I am liberal and love guns, and I also despise the constant right-wing rhetoric that surrounds the whole "gun-culture". I think it hurts the us all because a lot of people have this stereo-typical view of gun-owners as ignorant rednecks and it alienates the shooters who think differently and it scares away the non-shooters. I don't hate conservatives, just the extreme ones who spout non-sense at anyone who disagrees with them. This ain't directed at anyone in particular,just a general statement/ ShootingLiberal

::Uh, no. The gun owning crowd are NOT far right rednecks, but the damned LIBERALS sure like to make sure that this shallow stereotype is all that people recognize. Sorry, but being a proud card carrying Liberal and supporting guns is a contradiction, since Liberals by their philosophy see government as the best caretaker of the population, whereas the conservative sees the individual as the best caretaker of himself. Gun ownership is contradictory to the power of the state if the state wants all the power. Your quote was incredibly stupid and douchebaggy. Criticizing US as being humorless right wing gun nuts? The LEFT has no sense of humor (and your post proves it). Also quit being a douchebag and stop posting anonymously. All of our worst contributors pop in anonymously, type ridiculous posts and then either leave or are banned. Thanks for listening. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

:::"They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." - Barack Obama, 2008. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 02:18, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

:::^This. Seriously, I love how liberals like to pretend that gun owners are knuckle dragging idiots. Except, of course, when they're a gun owner; then they're responsible but everyone else can't be trusted. I absolutely agree, as well, that liberalism (much like socialism, communism, and marxism) views the government as the group best equipped to act as caretaker for the whole populace. Let's look at Obama's policies for a quick case in point; they're better equipped to determine prices of private goods, they're better equipped to determine what's best for you (you gotta buy that health insurance or pay a fine), they're best equipped to run private car manufacturers, they're best equipped to give out student loans, they're best equipped to run banks, etc. By the way, I especially enjoy how, when something occurs that actually lies in the purview of what the government is supposedly best equipped to handle, they botch it ridiculously (oil spill). Gun ownership goes against the liberal belief that the people best equipped to use firearms are, of course, chosen by the government. And the fact that you live such a contradictory lifestyle raises questions about your own willful ignorance.--[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 03:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

:- Oh goody, political bullshit. Not that I disagree really, but.. Bah. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 03:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

^ Me and him (ShootingLiberal) are in the same boat, 'cept I'm a agnostic [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 03:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::I knew there was something I didn't like about you! ;) LOL [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh crap, the guy with the warehouse full of guns doesn't like me [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 03:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::Naw, just a nauseated feeling of suspicion and distrust. Don't worry. I believe in the first amendment. You can believe whatever you want. But that crack sounds kinda like that 'this guy is dangerous because he has a lot of guns' crap that a lot of gun haters spout. Just noting ;) MPM

Oh, not at all. It a simple jibe is all. I apologize for the misunderstanding [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 05:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::Oh, Okay! :) Cool. But it's true.... I AM dangerous (quote from Top Gun) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 06:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Hoplite, we'll just use Obama's secret rights-stealing task force to take his guns.
:: Hahahaha. Just what I expected! ;) MPM

and MPM2008: You are completely over-reacting to what I'm trying to say. Not all liberals are communist, vegetarian, demons hell bent on turning the USA into the USSR. I believe in what Liberals believe, there are actually a lot of people like us, on specified boards and other gun forums. I've heard of tons of libs and moderates being afraid to identify themselves as such because they fear the backlash they might recieve. I just recently saw a confessed liberal getting ripped on 1911forums.com just for having it in his username, his post was about Military 1911's, nothing political to it and he still got ripped. Take a trip over to theliberalgunclub.org and you'll find that we enjoy guns just as much you or anyone else. There really is a conservative taste to the culture of gun-owners in America, a trip to any forum or gun range will show you that. It alienates many and scares off even more./ Shooting Liberal
::Well it's gotta be EXPECTED, being that Liberals are the PERSECUTORS of gun owners. Kinda like being a German and a NSDAP member in a Jewish community in the 1930s and saying "Hey! I don't like how I have to hide the fact that I'm a German AND an NSDAP member" Doh! Or did you forget that Liberals are the backbone of the gun prohibition movement? It's got to be expected. How can you guys expect anything else? Sorry about that. I don't bash Liberals in my many OTHER forums because it's not an issue. I am in many forums for filmmaking, technical aspects of film, special effects, film editing. Personally I don't care what a person's politics are. But consider that anti gun LIBERALS (yes I said it) have driven MOST of the movie armorers out of business, have driven most of the movie industry OUT of the U.S. (mostly due to their rampant love of taxation and red tape and anti business bias) and seek (indirectly mind you) to eliminate guns in films in general. Kinda ironic eh? [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 04:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::: It's not limited to driving firearms out of Hollywood, either. Liberals have been doing their best to destroy the people's ability and God-given right to keep and bear arms for decades. Recall the attempt to allow gun manufacturers to be sued for what their product was used for (no other product in America carries the same rules), the repeated attempts at standardizing ridiculous, ineffective, and prohibitively expensive 'safety' devices that make no one more safe, and, of course, the liberal leadership on the fight to destroy the gun show through various ridiculous methos, even though all data suggests criminals get their firearms from burglary more than anywhere else. 'Shooting Liberal', you're deluding yourself, and I suggest you look around you, because with every vote you cast for some liberal jackass, you're destroying your right to keep and bear arms.--[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 13:40, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::::By the way, liberalism is, in of itself, basically nanny-statism, and any nanny-state will eventually demand the firearms of their serfs. Liberalism makes everyone equally miserable except for the well-connected and political, much like communism. And, of course, there's that whole 'share the wealth' bullshit, because apparently I deserve to be taxed for creating jobs and making a legitimate wage so that someone can sit at home and watch cable TV or gamble at a casino with my tax dollars. Liberalism and the anti-gun agenda go hand in hand, and if you disagree, you're ignoring it.

You know, it's not only liberals who go forward with this anti-gun stuff. You'd be surprised how many Republicans support some of these gun control measures. Plus, since our Liberal president took office, your gun rights have actually grown. Now you can carry in a National park and transport firearms on an amtrak. Like I said earlier, a lot of Liberals are no where near what you think, we are people too :) and some of us are adament supporters of the right to bear arms
::WTF? Obama would NEVER increase gun rights on his own. The National park carry was PUSHED by Republicans! (and some pro gun Democrats). But I don't bash Obama for gun control, he hasn't done any (in fact you'll never find a bash on him by me anywhere on this site) Where do you live? It depends a lot on where you call home. In California we have a LOT of liberal fascists (i.e. liberals who are evil and crush all dissent). I have liberal friends who are HONEST liberals (i.e. they may have an opinion but they support the rights of others to have different opinions), but in SAN FRANCISCO and LALA land (especially the Hollywood crowd), the Liberals are intolerant bullies. I suppose that skews one's view of them. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 06:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::: Also, Obama didn't have any fingerprint on the law allowing carry in a national park. That was written and signed into law during the Bush administration; when Obama took power, he immediately halted it, and then it was reintroduced and re-signed later along with a bunch of other socialist things Obama wanted. AMTRAK legislation was ony passed because what it was attached to was a big part of Obama's agenda to destroy this country and strip people of as many freedoms as possible. Don't sit there and kid yourself, thinking Obama is a fan of the second amendment. He is not, by any stretch, a fan of your right to keep and bear arms. If you think he is, you're delusional. And as for 'republicans' who are anti-gun, note also that their voting records often reflect being more D than R, much like Arlen Specter. Just because you call yourself a Republican doesn't make you one. On the other hand, liberals are all against 2nd amendment rights, because you're too stupid to be able to handle such a dangerous item, but the people the government chooses for police departments are not.--[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 13:40, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::::PS.You seem to have conveniently forgotten the things Obama has done trying to destroy the right to keep and bear arms, including the attemtped scapegoating for the drug war in Mexico, the destruction of brass, and the fact that Hillary Clinton says she will sign the UN Weapons Ban. --[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 13:46, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
:::::First off, wow, this got ugly fast. And second, I think the Dems may be a little smarter now when it comes to gun control after they saw what happened to Al Gore after him and Clinton went a little too far (Florida wouldn't have mattered as much of Gore had actually won his home state.) Ironically, Barry is probably the best thing to happen to the gun industry in a long time. Sales went through the roof after he got elected due to the perception that he's going to go nuts on gun rights. Sure, he had the record, but I think he has bigger fish to fry (two simultaneous wars, horrible unemployment, the fact that none of his promised hope and/or change has come about, etc) , and as we have seen here, he may risk alienating the more socially conservative people in his party if he goes too far, like all the union-loving yet gun-happy Dems in Michigan. (And the only states that allow unrestricted carry are Arizona, Alaska and... Vermont?!) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:45, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
::::::Yeah, I don't disagree that after the response to much of the anti-gun nonsense occurring in the first year of Obama's term, they've realized what a touchy subject people's right to keep and bear arms is. Having said that, look at all the times that Obama and his administration have blatantly ignored the wishes of the American people. As for Democrat senators, I think they're starting to realize that it's not politically wise to be anti-gun, except for in a few liberal bastions in the country (shitholes like Chicago, New Jersey [which, I too, escaped, decades, and am thankful to have left], New York, California, etc.) where people who care for their rights are far outnumbered by those who want government handouts.
As for the 'bigger fish to fry' argument, I disagree. Look at all that Obama's socialist regime has done in the name of 'safekeeping the citizenry. It'll come in some way that you don't expect if he has time to get to it; it's not like he's been spending any time on those 'bigger fish' he ought be frying.--[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 00:55, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
:Well, aside from healthcare, which might not last long beyond January 8th, 2011, he's really got nothing else to tout. Yes, he has a Nobel Peace Prize. But to be fair, he only got it after he pulled us out of both Iraq and Afghanistan, closed the prison at Gitmo, allowed gay to marry and openly serve in the military and-- oh wait, that's right, he's done none of those things. And everybody on Fox News, Tea Party yahoos in a tricorner hats, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh will remind everyone of that until November of 2012. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 01:07, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
::I was more talking about all the environmental bullshit he's done (requiring a ridiculous 35 mpg average by what, 2016?), all the nutrition crap he's done (requiring businesses to put nutrition info on the menu), the whole attack against cloves (which is weird because all cloves were banned by the administration because the flavors were deemed marketing to kids, but for some reason, menthol flavoring is okay), and the fact that he's still pushing cap and trade even when 'global warming' is based on flimsy science and questionable datasets. Has he accomplished anything? Hell no, except to piss of a large portion of the electorate. The thing is, it doesn't seem to me like he's paying any attention to the things that are on his plate (the failing economy, the two wars, the Russians constantly invading our or Canada's airspace, the North Koreans trying to restart the Korean War proper, the Iranians with their nukes, the Venezualans seizing American property, the Oil Spill, the Immigration issue, etc.), so I question what he's spending his days doing. Surely, he can't be filling them entirely with fundraising, golfing, and throwing expensive and lavish parties on my tax dollar. What I'm implying is that the president is scheming something.--[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 13:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm from New Jersey, and I completely understand the way you feel. I'm just saying that it isn't only Liberals who are fucking with yours, mine, and everyone elses gun rights.
:Ah the Democratic People's Republic of New Jersey, where slingshots, pellet guns, and rubber band guns are considered firearms and require a permit to purchase. I'm so glad I got out. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:45, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I live in Oregon, a state that has been very consistantly liberal on most subjects, but has fairly pro-gun rights firearms laws. Gun rights are much more of a geographic issue than a party one. Last year a failed amendment to a bill that would have made concealed carry permits from one state valid in all states failed by only two or three votes. Many southern and western democrats supported this bill while many north-eastern republicans opposed it. Also, as a centrist who identifies with the Libertarians more than anyone else, I think this discussion has become a little bit too polarizing and mean-spirited. This is a valid debate, but I think withholding some of the more inflammatory language would greatly improve the tone of the discussion. -[[User:Anonymous|Anonymous]]

== ==

first off: I pretty much agree with what funkychinaman has said, I'm not saying Obama is very supportive of the 2nd ammendment but he's also not stupid. He would piss off a good bunch of people by going forward with the stuff he's preached in the past. I can understand his opinions on guns though, I've heard many people explain this and I sort of agree, Obama comes from a big city area where guns are more associated with crime than anything else and that's why a lot of people think the way they do, I disagree with that logic but I understand it. And with all of the other problems he has to deal with, I doubt much thought is going towards the rifles and handguns in your gun safe.

and asm: What you're saying sounds a lot like the kind of extremist bullcrap that you'd find on Glenn Beck's show or the average Rush Limbaugh radio broadcast. You sound like you think Obama is the devil in disguise who's only out to fuck us all. I suggest you stop listening to the doomsday theories and take a step back or two from the kind of stuff you're spewing, because you sound ridiculous/ ShootingLiberal

Talk:Colbert Report, The

2010-07-12T16:18:20Z

ShootingLiberal: /* */ new section

Talk:Colbert Report, The

2010-07-12T16:18:19Z

ShootingLiberal: /* */ new section

Talk:Colbert Report, The

2010-07-11T06:20:55Z

ShootingLiberal:

How ironic we have a page for a left wing antigun jerk like Colbert on IMFDB :)

what exactly makes him a jerk? Just because he's not a conservative gun nut?

We better put some kind of disclaimer on the page, since we're all humorless right wing gun nuts and any illusion of this being any kind of impartial catalog of weapons in film and television went out the fucking window a long time ago.

- Yeah, sure. Why not? :b [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 00:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::Yeah, ironic that a couple of anonymous douchbags [[User:69.152.170.239]] and [[User:70.111.177.84]] spout anti gun left wing sarcasm. Nice to know that the rest of us are "fascists" in your eyes. I wonder why those gun hating folks even POST HERE! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I love guns. I'm a firm supporter of the second ammendment. The only catch is that I'm also a proud liberal, atheist, pro gay marriage and all of the other stuff. Just because I don't preach from the bible of Beck and Limbaugh doesn't mean I'm a communist-socialist-facsist-or any other scary sounding word ending in "ist". I am liberal and love guns, and I also despise the constant right-wing rhetoric that surrounds the whole "gun-culture". I think it hurts the us all because a lot of people have this stereo-typical view of gun-owners as ignorant rednecks and it alienates the shooters who think differently and it scares away the non-shooters. I don't hate conservatives, just the extreme ones who spout non-sense at anyone who disagrees with them. This ain't directed at anyone in particular,just a general statement/ ShootingLiberal

::Uh, no. The gun owning crowd are NOT far right rednecks, but the damned LIBERALS sure like to make sure that this shallow stereotype is all that people recognize. Sorry, but being a proud card carrying Liberal and supporting guns is a contradiction, since Liberals by their philosophy see government as the best caretaker of the population, whereas the conservative sees the individual as the best caretaker of himself. Gun ownership is contradictory to the power of the state if the state wants all the power. Your quote was incredibly stupid and douchebaggy. Criticizing US as being humorless right wing gun nuts? The LEFT has no sense of humor (and your post proves it). Also quit being a douchebag and stop posting anonymously. All of our worst contributors pop in anonymously, type ridiculous posts and then either leave or are banned. Thanks for listening. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

:::^This. Seriously, I love how liberals like to pretend that gun owners are knuckle dragging idiots. Except, of course, when they're a gun owner; then they're responsible but everyone else can't be trusted. I absolutely agree, as well, that liberalism (much like socialism, communism, and marxism) views the government as the group best equipped to act as caretaker for the whole populace. Let's look at Obama's policies for a quick case in point; they're better equipped to determine prices of private goods, they're better equipped to determine what's best for you (you gotta buy that health insurance or pay a fine), they're best equipped to run private car manufacturers, they're best equipped to give out student loans, they're best equipped to run banks, etc. By the way, I especially enjoy how, when something occurs that actually lies in the purview of what the government is supposedly best equipped to handle, they botch it ridiculously (oil spill). Gun ownership goes against the liberal belief that the people best equipped to use firearms are, of course, chosen by the government. And the fact that you live such a contradictory lifestyle raises questions about your own willful ignorance.--[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 03:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

:- Oh goody, political bullshit. Not that I disagree really, but.. Bah. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 03:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

^ Me and him (ShootingLiberal) are in the same boat, 'cept I'm a agnostic [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 03:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::I knew there was something I didn't like about you! ;) LOL [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh crap, the guy with the warehouse full of guns doesn't like me [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 03:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::Naw, just a nauseated feeling of suspicion and distrust. Don't worry. I believe in the first amendment. You can believe whatever you want. But that crack sounds kinda like that 'this guy is dangerous because he has a lot of guns' crap that a lot of gun haters spout. Just noting ;) MPM

Oh, not at all. It a simple jibe is all. I apologize for the misunderstanding [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 05:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::Oh, Okay! :) Cool. But it's true.... I AM dangerous (quote from Top Gun) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 06:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Hoplite, we'll just use Obama's secret rights-stealing task force to take his guns.
:: Hahahaha. Just what I expected! ;) MPM

and MPM2008: You are completely over-reacting to what I'm trying to say. Not all liberals are communist, vegetarian, demons hell bent on turning the USA into the USSR. I believe in what Liberals believe, there are actually a lot of people like us, on specified boards and other gun forums. I've heard of tons of libs and moderates being afraid to identify themselves as such because they fear the backlash they might recieve. I just recently saw a confessed liberal getting ripped on 1911forums.com just for having it in his username, his post was about Military 1911's, nothing political to it and he still got ripped. Take a trip over to theliberalgunclub.org and you'll find that we enjoy guns just as much you or anyone else. There really is a conservative taste to the culture of gun-owners in America, a trip to any forum or gun range will show you that. It alienates many and scares off even more./ Shooting Liberal
::Well it's gotta be EXPECTED, being that Liberals are the PERSECUTORS of gun owners. Kinda like being a German and a NSDAP member in a Jewish community in the 1930s and saying "Hey! I don't like how I have to hide the fact that I'm a German AND an NSDAP member" Doh! Or did you forget that Liberals are the backbone of the gun prohibition movement? It's got to be expected. How can you guys expect anything else? Sorry about that. I don't bash Liberals in my many OTHER forums because it's not an issue. I am in many forums for filmmaking, technical aspects of film, special effects, film editing. Personally I don't care what a person's politics are. But consider that anti gun LIBERALS (yes I said it) have driven MOST of the movie armorers out of business, have driven most of the movie industry OUT of the U.S. (mostly due to their rampant love of taxation and red tape and anti business bias) and seek (indirectly mind you) to eliminate guns in films in general. Kinda ironic eh? [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 04:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

You know, it's not only liberals who go forward with this anti-gun stuff. You'd be surprised how many Republicans support some of these gun control measures. Plus, since our Liberal president took office, your gun rights have actually grown. Now you can carry in a National park and transport firearms on an amtrak. Like I said earlier, a lot of Liberals are no where near what you think, we are people too :) and some of us are adament supporters of the right to bear arms
::WTF? Obama would NEVER increase gun rights on his own. The National park carry was PUSHED by Republicans! (and some pro gun Democrats). But I don't bash Obama for gun control, he hasn't done any (in fact you'll never find a bash on him by me anywhere on this site) Where do you live? It depends a lot on where you call home. In California we have a LOT of liberal fascists (i.e. liberals who are evil and crush all dissent). I have liberal friends who are HONEST liberals (i.e. they may have an opinion but they support the rights of others to have different opinions), but in SAN FRANCISCO and LALA land (especially the Hollywood crowd), the Liberals are intolerant bullies. I suppose that skews one's view of them. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 06:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm from New Jersey, and I completely understand the way you feel. I'm just saying that it isn't only Liberals who are fucking with yours, mine, and everyone elses gun rights.

Talk:Kane & Lynch 2: Dog Days

2010-07-11T05:13:31Z

ShootingLiberal:

Talk:Colbert Report, The

2010-07-11T05:10:56Z

ShootingLiberal:

How ironic we have a page for a left wing antigun jerk like Colbert on IMFDB :)

what exactly makes him a jerk? Just because he's not a conservative gun nut?

We better put some kind of disclaimer on the page, since we're all humorless right wing gun nuts and any illusion of this being any kind of impartial catalog of weapons in film and television went out the fucking window a long time ago.

- Yeah, sure. Why not? :b [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 00:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::Yeah, ironic that a couple of anonymous douchbags [[User:69.152.170.239]] and [[User:70.111.177.84]] spout anti gun left wing sarcasm. Nice to know that the rest of us are "fascists" in your eyes. I wonder why those gun hating folks even POST HERE! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I love guns. I'm a firm supporter of the second ammendment. The only catch is that I'm also a proud liberal, atheist, pro gay marriage and all of the other stuff. Just because I don't preach from the bible of Beck and Limbaugh doesn't mean I'm a communist-socialist-facsist-or any other scary sounding word ending in "ist". I am liberal and love guns, and I also despise the constant right-wing rhetoric that surrounds the whole "gun-culture". I think it hurts the us all because a lot of people have this stereo-typical view of gun-owners as ignorant rednecks and it alienates the shooters who think differently and it scares away the non-shooters. I don't hate conservatives, just the extreme ones who spout non-sense at anyone who disagrees with them. This ain't directed at anyone in particular,just a general statement/ ShootingLiberal

::Uh, no. The gun owning crowd are NOT far right rednecks, but the damned LIBERALS sure like to make sure that this shallow stereotype is all that people recognize. Sorry, but being a proud card carrying Liberal and supporting guns is a contradiction, since Liberals by their philosophy see government as the best caretaker of the population, whereas the conservative sees the individual as the best caretaker of himself. Gun ownership is contradictory to the power of the state if the state wants all the power. Your quote was incredibly stupid and douchebaggy. Criticizing US as being humorless right wing gun nuts? The LEFT has no sense of humor (and your post proves it). Also quit being a douchebag and stop posting anonymously. All of our worst contributors pop in anonymously, type ridiculous posts and then either leave or are banned. Thanks for listening. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

:::^This. Seriously, I love how liberals like to pretend that gun owners are knuckle dragging idiots. Except, of course, when they're a gun owner; then they're responsible but everyone else can't be trusted. I absolutely agree, as well, that liberalism (much like socialism, communism, and marxism) views the government as the group best equipped to act as caretaker for the whole populace. Let's look at Obama's policies for a quick case in point; they're better equipped to determine prices of private goods, they're better equipped to determine what's best for you (you gotta buy that health insurance or pay a fine), they're best equipped to run private car manufacturers, they're best equipped to give out student loans, they're best equipped to run banks, etc. By the way, I especially enjoy how, when something occurs that actually lies in the purview of what the government is supposedly best equipped to handle, they botch it ridiculously (oil spill). Gun ownership goes against the liberal belief that the people best equipped to use firearms are, of course, chosen by the government. And the fact that you live such a contradictory lifestyle raises questions about your own willful ignorance.--[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 03:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

:- Oh goody, political bullshit. Not that I disagree really, but.. Bah. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 03:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

^ Me and him (ShootingLiberal) are in the same boat, 'cept I'm a agnostic [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 03:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::I knew there was something I didn't like about you! ;) LOL [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh crap, the guy with the warehouse full of guns doesn't like me [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 03:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
::Naw, just a nauseated feeling of suspicion and distrust. Don't worry. I believe in the first amendment. You can believe whatever you want. But that crack sounds kinda like that 'this guy is dangerous because he has a lot of guns' crap that a lot of gun haters spout. Just noting ;) MPM

Hoplite, we'll just use Obama's secret rights-stealing task force to take his guns.
:: Hahahaha. Just what I expected! ;) MPM

and MPM2008: You are completely over-reacting to what I'm trying to say. Not all liberals are communist, vegetarian, demons hell bent on turning the USA into the USSR. I believe in what Liberals believe, there are actually a lot of people like us, on specified boards and other gun forums. I've heard of tons of libs and moderates being afraid to identify themselves as such because they fear the backlash they might recieve. I just recently saw a confessed liberal getting ripped on 1911forums.com just for having it in his username, his post was about Military 1911's, nothing political to it and he still got ripped. Take a trip over to theliberalgunclub.org and you'll find that we enjoy guns just as much you or anyone else. There really is a conservative taste to the culture of gun-owners in America, a trip to any forum or gun range will show you that. It alienates many and scares off even more./ Shooting Liberal
::Well it's gotta be EXPECTED, being that Liberals are the PERSECUTORS of gun owners. Kinda like being a German and a NSDAP member in a Jewish community in the 1930s and saying "Hey! I don't like how I have to hide the fact that I'm a German AND an NSDAP member" Doh! Or did you forget that Liberals are the backbone of the gun prohibition movement? It's got to be expected. How can you guys expect anything else? Sorry about that. I don't bash Liberals in my many OTHER forums because it's not an issue. I am in many forums for filmmaking, technical aspects of film, special effects, film editing. Personally I don't care what a person's politics are. But consider that anti gun LIBERALS (yes I said it) have driven MOST of the movie armorers out of business, have driven most of the movie industry OUT of the U.S. (mostly due to their rampant love of taxation and red tape and anti business bias) and seek (indirectly mind you) to eliminate guns in films in general. Kinda ironic eh? [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 04:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

You know, it's not only liberals who go forward with this anti-gun stuff. You'd be surprised how many Republicans support some of these gun control measures. Plus, since our Liberal president took office, your gun rights have actually grown. Now you can carry in a National park and transport firearms on an amtrak. Like I said earlier, a lot of Liberals are no where near what you think, we are people too :) and some of us are adament supporters of the right to bear arms

Talk:Colbert Report, The

2010-07-11T04:19:12Z

ShootingLiberal:

Talk:Colbert Report, The

2010-07-11T04:18:50Z

ShootingLiberal: