Talk:Medal of Honor (2010): Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 15:33, 25 November 2022

Remington M24 a fake

Has anyone else noticed that the M24 in the game is in fact a Savage Model 10FCPXP rifle? And on top of that, the same rifle appears re-skinned as the M40 in Battlefield: Bad Company 2 Vietnam, albeit with a different scope?--GLOCK10mil 21:01, 8 August 2011 (CDT)

Missing weapons: Heavy Weapons In Singleplayer and Explosives Multiplayer

For the sake of being a complete guide there are still some weapons missing. The weapons I notice missing from this list include the emplaced weapons: The ZU-23 Anti-Aircraft gun which is seen in both singleplayer and multiplayer as an unusable model. The DShK heavy machine gun which appears in singleplayer on a shielded tripod mount and in "Breaking Bagram" as a technical mounted weapon that is used momentarily by the player. The explosives in the multiplayer game and their detonators deserve a separate mention as well (the C4 and IED respectively). The C4 is also used once in "Dorthy's a Bitch" in singleplayer. The SOFLAM in singleplayer may also be mentioned if it counts. The mortar used by the Taliban in the singleplayer game is pretty generic but might use a mention.

P.S. I would include them myself but I need to find a way to take screenshots via my PS3. Is there software to do this? Maphisto86 07:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Glock 19, tan Frame?

That frame looks tan. Not OD at all.

Its definately tan, I'm also pretty sure its a glock 17, my TV is low def but I'm sure its says 17.

Don't need to see the number to see that its a 17, its grip says all.--FIVETWOSEVEN 17:30, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Glock classified it's frames as OD, not tan. Take it up with Glock.

is it possible its a Glock 22? it would make sense with the ammo count. Dirtdiver6421 19:25, 3 April 2011 (CDT) I completely agree it's a Glock 22. I do way more damage with it.

Missing weapons

Glock 19, Deuce's sidearm both suppressed and unsuppressed.

DShK, which you have to suppress in the first Ranger mission.

Any screenshots of "new sidearms"

So we can add to main page?

-Yeah, I hear there's a Glock, but I have yet to see it.--Jackie.45Cal 15:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

It's in any level that you play as Duece. I'd take screenshots, but my camera sucks and I only have the 360 version of the game.--1SAZ 16:10, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

What model is it? I've heard 19.--Jackie.45Cal 16:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

It's a 19. 15+1 cap

I don't get the game until tomorrow (ready for a whole weekend of no work!) and if it hasn't been added, I'll see if I can get some pictures up.--Jackie.45Cal 09:25, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm just about done with the Airfield mission, so I'll be getting shots of Deuce's Glock 19 soon.--HashiriyaR32 19:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

New Sidearms confirmed!

New article reviled.

SF has a Glock. Ranger has the M9. And someone we havent seen named Rabbit Has a Sig. Navy Seal im guessing

"When you play as "Rabbit" you carry a Sig which looks like it has night sights.. When you play as "Deuce" you carry a Glock. And when you are Dante Adams you carry the M9. These weapons can never be dropped, never run out of ammunition, and are an integral part of each character’s identity. The variety in these side arms is also intended to help give distinction and personality to each of the characters represented in "Neptune", "Wolfpack" and 1/75th Ranger"

I have two things to say about that. One, I'm happy I wont have to look at an M9 throughout the campaign. Two, I hope they allow you to pick which pistol you use in mp since it'd effectively wouldn't change the balance at all. Just allow more individualism to the players. Did I mention I'm really tired of seeing the M9 in my games?

Forgive Beretta if they've created one of the most successful pistols of all time, and it happens to be used by the U.S. military. So...I think either you should go design a new gun to replace it, or just live with it. Unless of course you want them to have the U.S. standard sidearm be an HK P30 just to be 'original'.

Like most games the handguns will have different powers even if they're the same caliber, I'm betting. At least in Multiplayer anyways. Because in the level up screen you can see a level up sidearm section. And I'm hopeing only pistol are sidearms. Unlike modern 2 which had Shotguns and Machine pistols, which unbalanced the game

You DO remember the first Modern Warfare where you can have TWO primary weapons on you, that's even worse. Excalibur01 04:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually, MoH gives you two primaries and your secondary. Which actually isn't as bad as most would think. Some operators use a shotgun and their AR, and I'm sure having an SMG, a pistol and an M4 wouldn't be too bad, since I did it once for a test of my webgear for a review. Also, it's possible they could just use the different pistol models as just that, models. Same stats, but different appearance. --1SAZ 05:05, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

If you really think about it, having 2 Primaries on you, plus your sidearm is just too much. Maybe for a shotgun, but even then. You'd have 3 sets of reloads and it's already heavy on you. The only times An operator needs a shotgun alongside his rifle is that he needs to breach a door and no one else has a shotgun. Excalibur01 05:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree with ya about the having 3 different reloads, but depending on the weapons, the weight isn't so bad, or at least less noticeable. Anyway, it really could be worse. They could have you carrying two different types of rocket launchers and a machine gun like you can do in the Halo series.

At least they're making it so that you don't ditch a pistol two seconds into a level. I've always hated how any sidearm looses all use less than a minute into a game.--1SAZ 06:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Am I the only one here distressed by the unlimited ammo aspect of the sidearms? This game is getting to be more and more ridiculous as it is. Spartan198 10:26, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Remember MW2 ? 400 rounds was total standard. And there isnt any true difference between unlimited and 400.

I liked it back when you can keep your sidearm and just pick up another primary. Sure it's a bit unrealistic to be carrying the max ammo for that gun, but not as unrealistic as dropping your handgun for a shotgun Excalibur01 14:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The setup that Army of Two had was kinda neat. One primary (usually an assault rifle), your sidearm (a handgun or machine pistol), and a special weapon, like a sniper rifle or launcher of some sort - the special weapon usually had the least amount of ammo available. I'd like to see that for a game like this, and frankly, it'd make a lot more sense (I know about Rainbow Six: Vegas, but I'm quite unimpressed with how that game flows to be honest with you). When going into heavy combat, I'd like to have some kind of quickly accessible sidearm for when the shit well and truly hits the fan. If my main weapon runs dry and I need to switch, the backup shouldn't be a long gun that's equally as...cumbersome to bear as the rifle was (MW2, I'm looking at you). As for unlimited ammo, well, that's a tough one for me. Sometimes I really like having that capability (such as in Splinter Cell: Conviction with their sidearms). Other times, well, it's nice to know that I can't just fire all willy-nilly and carefree, because then I'll be out of ammo. I think that it should be an unlockable bonus - like Saints Row 2 or Resident Evil 5. Give people the option to play with it on or off, if they choose. Just don't glitch it like CoD4 did. --Clutch 22:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Where was it shown you get two primarys? Pretty sure its one primary and sidearm. Ive never seen or read about that in this game.

Two primary weapons in SP. One in MP.

Two primaries can make sense, a barett 82 and m240 makes no sense, but if you are using m24 or m40, it would make sense to carry an m4 for defense when your close up instead of room clearing with a bolt action.

Possible 1911

Settle an argument for me lads. Picture below, Possible 1911 if the standard Taliban Grach? [1] I doubt we can go by bore aperture on this one.--Jackie.45Cal 00:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Looks like the Grach, doesn't have the distinct look of a 1911's muzzle.

Knife?

I watched the "Leave a Message" trailer recently. I think one of the Rangers had a Gerber LMF II knife attached to his MOLLE vest. I own this same knife which is why it caught my eye.

Maybe so, but we need to avoid putting knives down. Yes, the MW2 page as well as some others have knives, but I'm in favor of removing said knives from said pages entirely. The site is called Internet Movie Firearms Database for a reason. Spartan198 06:00, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I prefer it to have ALL weapons listed its interesting and gives more content.

In that case, list it here in the discussion page when the game releases. A great example of this is the page for 2004's The Punisher. GM45 (I think it was him) took great care to screencap the variety of knives that movie had and list them there (among other things). But he left the main body of the page for the guns, which is why people come to this website. --Clutch 22:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

It is a member's CHOICE to add non-firearm weapons for trivia purposes. As long as the added blades or other weapons are well documented and the page does not consist entirely of non-firearms, it's perfectly fine. They're in a gray area, like explosives (grenades and C4 aren't firearms yet we document them) and improvised weapons (like the drill in Tomb Raider). - Gunmaster45

beta release date?

When will 360 beta be out? I keep hearing within a week but have seen no announcements by the company.

http://twitter.com/medalofhonor

http://twitter.com/pottan

Both links failed, and im getting pissed waiting, gives you high hopes for the games multiplayer when a short beta is this delayed......

I heard somewhere they're going to run it after they fix the bugs from the PS3/PC Betas, after they're done, because it will allow them to find new problems and because it saves money. Alex T Snow 21:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

weapon balance

i just saw the 12 round beretta mentioned i think they did that for balance reasons. Another game too focused on fairness. God forbid you unlock a gun later on that just owns.

-k9870

Yeah its kind of annoying when its that balanced, at least you could pretend its the .40, but I wouldn't even know what to do with the Grach, its named the Tariq (which is something else) and has 12 rounds too, when its supposed to have 17. Wait, couldn't they both just have been 16 to be in between? If I WAS going to make an overly balanced system like this, I'd try to make it close, why take them both down to 12? Alex T Snow 19:38, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Pretend it's the .40 too

Haha too bad there isn't one... WAIT! If you really want to stretch it you could pretend its the compact MP-448, 12 rounds of 9x18mm lol :D Alex T Snow 03:02, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I hate when the do something like "the m4 has 20 power and 30 fire rate, the AK has 30 power and 20 fire rate, so there balanced. Then they go weapon x is more accurate than weapon y since its weaker and needs an advantage. I wish when you leveled up you had guns with good advantages that just own.

-k9870

I want a game that keeps the round in the chamber, keeps track of your extra mags (not the one big number bullshit), all the functions to be right, none of the guns to be set in a firing mode they're not in, the ability to switch modes to whatever that weapon has, the correct attachments (no AKs with ACOGs, or M14s and G3s with M203s), the correct animations for reloads, correct fire rates, correct mag capacities, correct zooms on scopes and no zoom on reflex sights/irons sights, its not really too much to ask I don't think. The only thing that would be arguable would be damage stuff does, but for the MOST part if you used the calibre measurement as the damage it would work (i.e. 5.56mm does about 22 damage, 7.62mm does 30, .50 does 50) it's not perfect but I at least want the guns with the same calibres to do the same damage... Rant done. Alex T Snow 22:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

There is a game for you, it's called ArmA. Mainstream arcadey FPS won't have all these features. But I agree at least counting bullet up the pipe would be nice touch. That always bugged me too. I have no idea why CoD games still doesn't have this. Anyway, ACOG (or any other weaver optic) on AK is not a problem via special mount. 203 on G3 and M14 is possible too.

Oh believe me, I wouldn't need ALL that, I still play the mainstream FPSs, it would just be nice, I just kept going with the list ;) And I do know you can technically put an ACOG on an AK or a 203 on the M14 or G3, but it would be nice to see the things that are supposed to be there... there, like the HK79. The attachments thing certainly wouldn't be as important to me as the round in the chamber, and I don't think guns of the same calibre having the same damage would be too much, its not that would take any extra effort... Alex T Snow 05:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Same caliber doesn't always do same damage when shot from different barrels. M16 and M4 is a good example. In case with M16 bullet tumble and fragment thus making more damage, but when the same ammo shot from M4 it does not.

I knew that but didn't want to make my posts too long ;)That's fair, I meant more the stuff that doesn't make sense, like a 12 gauge that does more damage than another 12 gauge because it's pump action vs semi-auto, or like in Modern Warfare 2, which is the game I'm mostly complaning about, the F2000 has a 15.7" barrel and does 30 damage, while the TAR-21 has an 18.1" does 40, I know the idea of damage as a numerical system like this isn't realistic in a lot of ways, but it's the best anyone has been able to come up with so far, and I wouldn't think 2.4 inches of barrel would make that much of a difference. Put it this way, out of the 9 assault rifles in that game there are only 3 different damages, the 30, 40, and 55, keep in mind that the calibres here are 5.56, 7.62, and 7.62 NATO: the M4, ACR, and F2000 do 30, the FAMAS, SCAR, TAR-21, M16A4, and AK-47 do the same (lol what?) at 40, and the FAL does a whopping 55 (because its semi). But the single worst is the UMP and Super V, both .45s with a comparible barrel length, the UMP does 40 (again) and the the Super V does... 25. I know there should be differences but this makes NO SENSE. Sorry, I know this is the Medal Of Honor page, but everyone here seems smarter... Alex T Snow 07:34, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It's not a simulator. They needed to differentiate gun's performance. Besides, most people playing it doesn't know shit which caliber it shoots. So probably it's better to just get over it. Try playing hardcore mode and weapon damage won't bother you so much.

I know :) it doesn't really matter too much, it would just be nice, but I'm not expecting it though lol Alex T Snow 06:40, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

seriously, no 1911 very disapointing. it might be outdated but Special Forces still use them. Dirtdiver6421 00:11, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Who said there won't be a 1911 in the final game? This isn't the final game. Alex T Snow 00:45, 7 July 2010 (UTC) i dont know. i just figured since its not on the page already they wouldnt have it. but i hope they do. its a great gun and is used by Spec Ops. Dirtdiver6421 00:46, 7 July 2010 (UTC) i think that all the comparisons come from MW2 because it has an overwhelming amount of flaws. for example- what has been previously stated. and does anyone else find it peculiar that all assault rifles lose the front sight when optics are attached? knowone would do that its stupid. what if there was a long battle and you ran out of battery on a dime, nope your dead now. and i kind of agree with the lack of a back sight because it takes away the point of the reflex being quick if you have to line 3 things to a target instead of the 1-2 or a normal rifle.

First Part

This game looks very promising in terms of realism and graphics compared to the other games. I'm excited to see that the game developers are working with REAL special forces operators. The game comes out in Fall 2010. CAN'T FREAKIN WAIT!!!!!!- ArmoredMason619

I've always had a soft spot with this series. I really hope they knock it out of the park with this one.

I'm guessing the guy on the front cover is a Green Beret?-- John Ryder

For some reason I though the guy on the front page was a PMC --AdAstra2009 05:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Na he is a Green Beret. That's the way they look when they are in a combat zone. They have to grow out a beard and dress like the civilians/insurgents in that particular area.-ArmoredMason619

A World War II shooter series is switching to a modern setting? It'll never work.

Your kidding right...and sign your posts --AdAstra2009 23:25, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The graphics appear to be on par with America's Army 3, though hopefully it'll have less problems and a better weapon selection. Orca1 9904 23:36, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The trailer had what looked like an M249 SAW variant fitted with an EOTech red dot sight, but I only saw it for a second looking down the sights in first-person mode so couldn't determine wether it was a standard SAW or specialized version like the Paratrooper or SPW. Orca1 9904 23:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I added a screen of the M4A1 and the Minimi/SAw possibilty. --TheCrazyGunNut

Ah, cheap EA.. This is so obvious that they are doing this because of MW success. Won't buy just because of this fact.

Or because WWII has been overdone and they wanted to do something else. --Crazycrankle 02:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

20th century saw so many wars. They could pick any one. The most suitable would be Vietnam war. I can't recall many good games about this conflict. It could be about SF also.

How about Vietcong? http://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Vietcong In my personal oppinion the best PC game from Vietnam conflict up to date. I know that the Vietcong wasn't perfect but other games usually wasted their potential (e.g. Conflict Vietnam, Men of Valor) ended as a low quality budget (first Shellshock 67 and many others) or as some crazy VC/NVA-zombie kill fest (recent Shellshock 2).

I agree that there were many other "interesting" conflicts or suitable theathers for FPS games but "supply is influenced by demand". The "anti-terrorist" theme is actual and developers don't want to risk introducing a game that "nobody would want to play". Remember it's all about the money. Actually it's quite strange that if I look backwards I can't recall any good or partially realistic FPS from Afganistan or Iraq theatre - Modern Warefare, appart from other parts of the story, was set partialy in the Middle East but in some fictisious country (and that *** spoliler *** nuking of the whole Marine division *** spoiler *** was complete bullshit) and Modern Warefare 2 was about hunting down some crazy Russian ultranationalists (and *** spoiler *** one rouge American general *** spoiler *** that was bullshit as well). No offence to Call of Duty but I personally hope that Medal of Honor would not turn into such killfest of stupid AI NPC duchebags thrown in absolutely ridiculous waves into a single coridor where you have to kill more than 70 opponents on less than 100 square feet ...

Wow, so doing something original is bullshit? I mean, come on; I'd rather shoot 70 guys in a single cooridor than simply go from cave to cave, shooting the occasional militant, or riding about in my vehicle until I hit a bomb and get ambushed. Generic examples I know, but put simply, fighting a military-trained, fully-equipped soldier is a lot more exciting than some fanatical militant using 30-year-old weapons. Heck, even America's Army created a fictional enemy for the US Army to fight.

Judging by what I'm seeing in the trailer this is going to be far from any CoD style of modern warfare. This shit looks seriously hardcore in terms of trying to replicate some actual Iraq/Afghanistan gameplay. I guess only time will tell. Hopefully by then they fix the damn gas block thing. Fuck that pisses me off. These guys are working with tier 1 operators but they don't want to model the damn gun correctly. Anybody with even slight knowledge of an AR-15 platform would notice this error. It's a big frickin error.ShaDow XPS

"replicate actual Iraq/Afghanistan gameplay"? So coalition forces playing in a sandbox there? And duh, there is a gas-block, it's just too low-profile and you cannot see it.

Even if the gas block isn't there, does it really matter? The average gamer probably doesn't know, or care, what a gas block is, let alone whether it's actually there or not; and the Medal of Honor series goes for what looks cool (such as the Flak Tower in Airborne), not what's realistic.

Don't change the intent of my words. Let me rephrase :::"replicate some actual Iraq/Afghanistan fighting into gameplay." There happy? As well the use of a low profile gas block seems like an excuse. What are the chances that every M4 has a low profile gas block when there are attached optics?ShaDow XPS

Why not? It's a game about hi-speed low-drag tear1 omfgd3ltasealz special forces operators.

That's Tier 1. And even a low-profile gas block would still be visible on the barrel where the standard FSP would be due to the length of the gas tube. Spartan198 01:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

North American release date is October 12, 2010. Europe is October 15.-- John Ryder

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFpgNJZ8Fhc&playnext_from=TL&videos=vd-xeQ7FyHw ^ At 0:56, 1:04, 1:16 you can see a stock, body, and barrel of a M14 EBR. At O:43 you can see what I believe to be some kind of M240.*EDIT: Mk 46 Mod 0* All along the trailer are M4s with optics and different accessories. -DeltaOp

Was the Mark 14 EBR even fielded yet in 2002? Spartan198 01:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

- Nope. EBR was designed around that date - 2001/2002 but first units (mostly from Navy Seals) were issued this rifle later on in 2004. So it's probably another game inaccuracy.

Who said it was set in 2002? And the gas block isn't removed for optics like in Call Of Duty, it's removed when the M203's flip up sight is on top, I'm thinking it's not to block that, not that I think it would block it, but that's when it's not there, not because of optics. EDIT: Wow my bad, it is set then, and I was thinking the M203 was an attachment, but its fixed on like in BFBC2, wow, I feel dumb lol. EDIT #2: I figured it out, the M16 removes the front sight for optics, but the M4 doesn't. Odd. Alex T Snow 08:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Green Beret on cover

It's Cowboy! [2] Spartan198 01:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Lmao. Oh i didnt think of that one. -Winn

Anyone think its kinda odd that the Rangers seem to be doing alot of the work. along with the Green Beret. Wouldnt Delta Force/Navy SEALs be doing most of the stuff?

1st SFOD-D and Navy SEALs are, let's say, "equal" to Special Forces concerning their roles within US SOCOM. They are highly trained operators used for specific and "delicate" stuff. Rangers are more like muscless used for more "dirty" tasks. In reality, you would rather send a Special Forces A-Team to do cool things like - to recon the enemy airfield, to pin point potential high-value targets, to set observation post for calling CAS missions or to set sniping posts with 18B class operators with sniper rifles; while few C-130s packed with Ranger chalks would wait to "go-order" so they can jump in, do all the hard work and blow the enemy to pieces. Special Forces (Delta/SEALs etc.) are too valuable for such things. Even though, they are capable of kicking some serious ass, it is not practical to "mass" several A- or SEAL teams for a task, which bunch of Ranger squads could do better.[Ragnar]

okay thats true, but i just dont see why there wouldnt be SOME Operators or SEALs, think about this. Rangers are like the backbone of USSOCOM, Green Berets, are trained in Reconaissance, but if u want to kick some serious Taliban ass, u send in Operators or SEALs, because they excel at kickin' the door down, and opening up some whoop-ass. Dirtdiver 6421 00:40, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Who is the "Operators"?

Delta "Operators". Pz.Abt.100 22:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

but really, i no Delta is more of a mission specific unit, but seriously what is America's best military asset? 1stSFOD-D. why? because they have close to 500 Operators, the best in the world. and officially they dont exist. political bull shit in the way, no problemo. they dont exist. its denieble if you send them in.71.194.219.9 19:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok let me straightin this out just a bit. Ragnar is correct about what they say but somethings are a bit off. First, 1st SFOD-D and SEALs are not exactly the same. The Navy's equivalent of 1st SFOD-D(Delta, or the DODs name for them CAG[Combat Applications Group]) is DEVGRU( Naval Special Warfare Development Group, more commonly known as SEAL Team Six), yes they are SEALs but they serve a different purpose. Second, you are right about the purpose of Ranger's, besides the fact that a select few have been sent on small team missions(4 to 12). The 75th Ranger Regiment is the highest for of Ranger special operations beside a certain few Task Force's they have been added to. Delta, DEVGRU, SAD, and SOG are among the designated, "Tier 1" units in the U.S.

SOG is a part of SAD, and SAD is a component of the CIA, not SOCOM, and hence isn't classified anywhere on the SOF Tier System. Spartan198 21:25, 26 February 2012 (CST)

SOG maybe a part of SAD but they are considered seperate due their overall mission and each of them recruit completely seperate form the other. One being apart of covert political actions and the other(SOG)being the "boots on the ground" paramilitary operators. And because of their training, where their operators originate and their very close knit relationship with USSOCOM they are considered "Tier One".Puppet.of.fate 02:03, 29 February 2012 (CST)

Rangers have a close knit relationship with Delta, but that doesn't make them a tier 1 SMU. SAD isn't a USSOCOM component, it's CIA. The CIA isn't a USSOCOM component, so SAD doesn't have a tier classification. A given unit has to be a USSOCOM component in order to be classified as such. Spartan198 02:51, 29 February 2012

It isn't stated anywhere that Teir One units are designated only to USSOCOM. 1st SFOD-d, DEVGRU, 24th STS, and ISA are USSOCOM's designated SMU, SAD is the CIA's SMU. SAD operator's are comprised of former 1st SFOD-D, DEVGRU, SF, Ranger's and so on. Oh and something wiki doesn't tell you is there are at least two more SMU's out there that remain unnamed. Oh another thing, a lot of CIA/NSA black ops units are considered SMU's because of the missions they receive.Puppet.of.fate 04:24, 29 February 2012 (CST)

Guns revealed in multi-player demo at E3

(These are just what I could spot while watching it on TV)

Beretta 92FS/M9 (not a 92SB like in CoD, had the squared-off trigger guard)
Pump-action shotgun I couldn't identify (they only showed it from the back)
Bolt-action sniper rifle, presumably a Remington M24 (only saw it from the back and right side as the player was working the bolt)
Not actually a new gun, but the M4A1 also had a low-profile front BUIS mounted on the RIS is some scenes

Spartan198 22:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

If you check the kill feed immediately after the kill with the sniper rifle, the identifies the unknown rifle as a Sako M57. --HashiriyaR32 16:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I found some footage: http://videos.pcgames.de/v/MuuqC3iXMpw/Medal-of-Honor/Multiplayer-Gameplay-E3-2010/ (the shotgun is a TOZ-194)

More confirmed weapons. I recommend you keep your eye to the left of the screen, below the radar, to see some weapons we have missed while watching the video.

RPK-Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

RPG 7-In-game footage

AK-47-Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

AT-4 (I think by the ingame footage)

M9- From ingame footage

SVD Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

M249 Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

TT-30 Seen ingame

MP7A1 This one was very hard to see (Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

M-21 Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

870MCS Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

M60 Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

List

I'm gonna put all the ones I've seen down, so we've got one big list (this is all from the 11 minute long multiplayer video, both seen on screen and on the killfeed) If the names are given (killfeed ones) I'm writing them exactly as they are named in game. For the ones that aren't named I'll name them what they are.

M16

M203

AK-47

GP-30

M249

PKM

M4

AKS-74u

870MCS

TOZ-194

AT4

RPG-7

M21

SVD (NOTE: Has a straight .308 magazine)

M24

SV-98

M9

MP-443 (NOTE: Appears as the Tariq, which I thought that was an Iraqi-made Beretta clone...)

(From here down is not in the Beta)

RPK

MP7A1

M240

M60

M14 EBR (Seen in other videos. It is NOT the same as the M21 like it is in certain other games, the M21 has a normal M21 type body and stock, BOTH are in this.) Alex T Snow 04:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Spliting into sections

Wont it make sence to make two sections ? One with MP´s guns and one with SP´s guns. I think it will - because they dont use same engine, so guns can be different.

Why would the single player and multiplayer use different engines? That makes no sense. It would make the modelers have to model everything twice, and take up twice as much space on disc. No. We're not going to do that.-protoAuthor 19:35, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

It USES different engines. MP is running on frostbite, and SP is running on UT3 one.

Not sure if i'm doing this right, but yes it uses different engines, and the modelers do not have to model everything twice, they can easily import it from a common format to both engine's formats, PSK Mesh (or something) for UT3, and a new version of bundledmesh contained in RES files for frostbite. You don't have to model it twice, you just export within both engines.

It still makes no sense to split up the page. But thank you for enlightening me to something that still makes no sense to me. Why would they do that?-protoAuthor 16:54, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The only reason i could possibly see would be to make a comparable multiplayer experience for BFBC2 players, And they might have already started building singleplayer on the unreal engine, which most if not all of the previous MoH games used. In my opinion, it shouldn't be split either, means some firearms would be listed twice. btw this isn't the original poster, this is the guy from the post before proto's last.

Ok than. It doesnt have to be split, but there should be atlest writed to each screenshot " This is from Multiplayer/ Singleplayer". And just one little BTW: They modelled it twice. As you can see, M4 or MK46 HAVE different models.

That's because the M4 and Mk. 46 are different guns, silly.-protoAuthor 04:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh. I mean that M4 looks different in SP and MP. Same with Mk.46

They do look different but I think its just because one sets from that first trailer a while ago, game's graphics always get better as develpment keeps going, but you might be right to, I was just throwing that out there. Alex T Snow 08:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

LMG Special Weapons

In the sniper class you get C4, in the special ops class you get a rocket, and with an assault rifle in the rifleman class you get a launcher... so what do you get if you equip an LMG? Alex T Snow 09:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

more ammo?

Absolutely nothing. You have 2 spare 150 round mags (in the beta, with the PK).

You have self-destruct vest.

Is that a joke or can you actually be a suicide bomber, cause what would the American gunners get? Alex T Snow 21:14, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

C4

It is then? Okay cool, I figured but I wasn't sure, I can't check because the 360 beta was delayed :( Alex T Snow 19:37, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Best of 3 shooters?

I have to say, out of the 3 FPS games that will be coming out in Q4 (this one, Spec Ops: The Line, and CoD: Black Ops), I am looking forward to Medal of Honor the most. From what I've seen about the other two, they look like they're filled with sensationalist b.s. . -Any Mouse

MoH looks WAY to much like Bad Company 2, and I think it's EAs fault. They want to capitalize on the modern warfare craze so much, they're using another popular series to boost sales. To be honest, MOH looks like BC2 with Taliban, and I'll most likely not be getting it. M14fanboy

Medal of honor is not going to be way too much like BC2 because the gameplay will be much more tactical and realistic. Like real modern warfare.

Says you man. Face it, it's going to be bought by the same type of people who buy MW2 and BC2, mostly idiot kids ranging from 10 to 15 who just wanna get four man sprays and noob tubes across the map. This is a console FPS that can be bought by anyone, and has nothing to offer that will make it overly unique, so it will end up like MW2 and BC2, noob weapons will arise, and it will just be another chaotic FPS. M14fanboy

You got a point there.

Spec Ops: the Line is a third person shooter, not an FPS.

Sorry, my bad. I thought it was one of those deals like Fallout 3 where you could switch from first-to-third-person and back -Any Mouse

Animations

I know this is off-topic, but am I the only one bothered by the way your character moves? If a gun is bouncing around in your hands while you move like that, there's gotta be something wrong...

I think that only happens in multiplayer due to it being a different engine, but yeah it is weird

I was really psyched about the game untill i found out it was made by the people who made BF-BD2. you said it was a different engine. does that mean that it will be different creators or what? Dirtdiver6421 17:04, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Mp is made by BC2 (not BD2 ) creators - DICE. So it means only good part on that game will be SP - developed by EA on UT3 engine.

Full Auto M16A4

Wouldn't having an M16A4 on full auto make it a C7A1? I know there are a few other differences, but they're all internal, it's the only difference visible in some way. Alex T Snow 18:23, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Well I would have said M16A3, but those didn't have rails. So yes, the only M16 variant that has an RIS system and goes full-auto is the C7A2, so indeed this new game uses a C7. M14fanboy

M16A4 with FA lower - what could be easier

Personally, I wouldn't call "full-auto" M16A4 a C7A2. C7A2 has some, more or less significant, differences - e.g. ambidextrous fire selector or retractable stock. Plus Canadian military did not use full length RIS systems (e.g. like King Arms M5 on M16A4) on their C7s. Full-auto M16A4 is just another game-developer inaccuracy created by lack of knowledge about firearms. Unfortunately, it's a trend in nowadays mainstream FPS like Modern Warfare or Battlefield Bad Company. Game developers just give a sh*t about this stuff. 13-year-old kids screaming and b*tching in multiplayer would not notice the difference. [Ragnar]

3-burst is for nubs that can't cut it by themselves.

The M5 RAS on the M16A4 is made by KAC, not King Arms. Spartan198 11:33, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Of course I realize that having it full auto is just a screw up, like in most movies, and I'm not talking about the C7A2, with the green furniture and ambi controls, I meant the C7A1, which is the same in terms of appearance. Here's one without an ELCAN, because I know someone will complain about that: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/7/76/20080716042205!C7A1_with_IronSights.JPG Oh and you can put the KAC Rails on any M16-length AR, so that's not really an issue, some of the C7A1s (like the one pictured) had them put on before the C7A2 was introduced with the TRIAD. Alex T Snow 18:22, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

It could be a C7, but really, it's just EA's lack of knowledge about weapons, cause full auto is what every assault rifle shoots, right? Man, games like Call of Duty 4 tried their best to keep weapons accurate, now it's all about tacticool weapons that fire full auto and have cool sights and nice finishes. M14fanboy

Yeah I know, and guns don't need to be re-chambered after they run empty too :p in this and Bad Company 2, it's kind of distracting when I'm playing to be honest, well, I've gotten used to it a little more by now. Okay what I don't get is why can't it be listed as a C7A1? Or at least mentioned... If there was an gun listed as an M4 (not A1) and it was firing full auto you guys would have no problem saying it's actually an M4A1, or an AK-47 is really an AKM, so why can't the M16 really be a C7? I realize it's just a mistake on the developer's part, but that doesn't stop us pointing out the other ones... Alex T Snow 16:56, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea if we mentioned that in reality, this would class it as a C7A1 etc. Hoot471 18:26, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Has there even ever been any instances of a burst-firing M4 used in any movie or video game? At any rate, I think just noting that it's inaccurately portrayed as full auto is enough. Spartan198 20:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Well if you talk to the Green Beret on Deadliest Warrior, he'll tell you the M4 can go burst AND full auto! But yeah, just classify the M16 in MOH as a C7A1, cause in reality that's what it is. M14fanboy

http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/1009334.page

Best 5 minutes of my life reading this! Hoot471 20:01, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Well if you talk to the Green Beret on Deadliest Warrior, he'll tell you the M4 can go burst AND full auto! - Believe it or not, 4-position selectors for AR-15 type rifles exist. There should be a link to the patent in the Season 2 discussion. --HashiriyaR32 22:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

The so-called "Green Berets" on that show were idiot actors who didn't do their research, so I don't really give a crap about what they say. The M4A1 as used by the US military is safe/semi/auto, no burst. 4-pos selectors may exist, but the US military does not use them. That also wasn't an answer my question. Have there ever been any instances of a burst-firing M4 used in any movie or video game? By "burst-firing M4", I mean the M4 with M16A2/A4 trigger group as issued en mass to regular US Army troops. Spartan198 07:01, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I only know of two games that have M4s with the A2/A4 trigger group. There's one of the Call of Duty Modern Warfare games for the Nintendo DS, and then there's the Battlefield 2 mod Project Reality, where it features both burst-firing M4s for the Americans and full-auto M4A1s for the Israelis.--HashiriyaR32 16:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, that did answer my question. Also, lol @the thread on EA Forums. That was a pretty entertaining read. Though I quite disagree with the guy who claims you can't know anything about an M16 or other firearm without having handled or used one. I've never handled an M16, but I still know the difference between an A1, A2, A3, and A4. Good thing I quit bothering with that place within the first few days I registered, otherwise I'd probably be ankle-deep in that ****storm. XD Spartan198 22:52, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

To Hoot471, that forum nearly gave me a headsplosion, how can people be so unbelievably ignorant and stupid?! - Gunmaster45

Hi-Def MP videos

You guys might want to check this out: On YouTube, there's someone by the name of deluxe345 who has Hi-Definition videos from the Medal of Honor multiplayer (there are 3 or 4). Also, in one of these videos, I spotted an M224 mortar in the killfeed.

360 Beta?

Alright, does anyone on Earth have a clue when the 360 beta for this comes out!? PS3 and PC went up June 21st, and yet 360 is still delayed, anyone got a clue? M14fanboy

I got deployed for deepwater horizon so no vid games till september. I seriously wish that the release had been on time, I could have played it.

Clip/Magazine

A frivolous debate, but why oh why must they call the magazines "clips" in the game? Yuck. - Gunmaster45

I don't know why, but the same error happened in an episode in Lois & Clark. They probably got confused with clips and magazines since that they are both similar. - Kenny99 19:02, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

There is nothing similar between a clip and a magazine. A Magazine is a block that stores the bullets, a clip is a strip of metal that holds the bullets that are then FED into a Magazine. Excalibur01 01:44, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

They could have said the slang term "mag" though.

"The Catalyst" Linkin Park song trailer

Well, there gave been some new guns spotted and i already identified few of them. But can someone help me with this ?

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Magazine seems to wide and big for 5.56. I truly need help with this.

Could it be the 417 ?

Why is it that people immediatly assume a HK 416 or a HK 417 when it comes to this kind of thing? People apparently have never heard of a AR 10 before.--FIVETWOSEVEN 19:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the MP5 is shown at one point in the trailer. I'd have to look at the trailer again to find the exact point, but I'll update when I do find the time stamp. Lets hope we see the MP5 in multiplayer as well as the campaign if my spot is correct. Also, I'm pretty sure the picture shown above is just the M4A1, but I'm not 100%. --1SAZ 22:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC) 1:30 seconds in, on the operator's chest. I am pretty sure that's an MP5A3 or A5. Can anyone confirm? --1SAZ 23:22, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

That's M4 or might be h&k 416. Clip is just taped. Also, all this specop theme became too popularized after MW1. Don't like.

It's called a Magazine or Mag. Don't like Excalibur01 20:01, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

After re-watching the video for the 17th or so time, the weapon I thought was the MP5 was just an MP7 that blended a little too well into the vest. That said, I did notice that one of the Rangers in the trailer was using an Aimpoint M68 (Comp M2) sight on his M4A1. Possibly another sight option? Who knows. I just know I'm excited for this game.

It's an M4 kitted out with an EOTech 552, KAC Free-Float RAS, PEQ-2A, and KAC broomstick. Spartan198 05:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

According to the Walkthrough trailor for the first mission this is CQB-R verzion of the M4A1.

Yes, we know that now. Keep in mind that my above post is dated August 2010, which was about 3 months before the game's release. There was no walkthrough to tell that at the time. Spartan198 21:18, 7 November 2011 (CST)

Unimpressed....

Anybody else feel unimpressed looking at this game? I mean, nothing about it really stands out to me. The firearm selection is trite and cliche, the modern military tacticool spec ops motif has been done far too much, and so has the idea of weapon customization. Honestly, when I saw this game I just kinda yawned and moved on. -- K 98.118.59.244 19:22, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

About that firearms choose : So you would give terrorists XM8´s, just because its cliche in video games ? No. So why not give them weapons they use in real ?

No I wouldn't, unless a terrorist militia could plausibly get it hand's on a bunch of HK weapons. I'm just sort of sick of seeing the same stuff over and over and over. -- K 98.118.59.244 09:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I actually see this as a good change from Modern Warfare and Bad Company rather than yet another tacticool game. Sure, most of it has been done, but so has most other games. At least its not YET another World War 2 sim.--1SAZ 20:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

But see, that's the whole thing. Instead of "yet another WW2 sim," it's become "yet another Spec Ops shooter." And for the record, I liked Bad Company, and I don't see how this will be any different. -- K 98.118.59.244 23:30, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I am truly impressed with this game. Lets talk about it as MW2 on steroids :

Much more realistic ( Cmon, Russians with tavors and milita with tactical AK´s ? )

Much better atmosphere ( That attempt to make everything cool just failed. Also enviroment wasnt the best seriously )

Better Gameplay ( It probably wont be just about shooting thousands of enemy troops. Also helicopter. Probably even some AI will be included ? )

Then I better get this for my 360 then PC, cause the graphics are just as high as BC 2 so it'll mess with my PC. The Multiplayer was designed by the same guys who did Bad Company, so we see a lot of their handy work. Excalibur01 05:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, comparing ANYTHING to MW2 instantly makes it better. And if what excalibur says is true, then I'm inclined to go with what everybody else has been saying and write it off as Bad Company 2 with Taliban. -- K 98.118.59.244 11:07, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

We are talking about SP. MP will be BC2 clone ( Yeah. Same people are doing it, why not then ? ).. But SP will be better :P

Heavily looking forward to SP. MP might as well be called "Call of Duty: Bad Company 8".

Oh yeah, I'd certainly be willing to try the single player if it looks any good. Not sure if I'd pay full release price for it though, I'll probably go out and buy it later on when it gets down to like 40 bucks. -- K 98.118.59.244 14:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I just find it odd that they'd get a completely different group to do the multiplayer and when you look at the multiplayer, it feels like MW2 but with a different game engine. The point and level up system is essentially the same, but the classes are almost the same from Bad Company. Excalibur01 02:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, I had high hopes for this game, but with the "Catalyst" trailer (overly dramatic acting plus ear-bleeding Linkin Park= FAIL), it just looks like something else that fanboys will be able to wax their carrots to. Ain't no way in hell I'm shelling out $60 just to hear some USI-infested teenager (whose gamertag is [USMC]"xxSwaggaSniperxx" or something else that sounds mall ninja-ish) cuss me out after I've killed him twice in a row.74.192.58.206

I watched said trailer and completely gave up on this game. -- K 98.118.59.244 09:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah. After this, we're gonna hear a bunch of kids running around yelling "yaaah I am teh Tier 1!" Methinks that some top dog at EA got a boner after reading Sean Naylor's Not a Good Day to Die and got the idea to rehash a great book and dumb it down into a cheap vidya game.74.192.58.206 22:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Everyone, this is a video game. Nobody cares how realistic or how the story is, if you can shoot thing and take control of an over exaggeration of our armed forces, then people will buy it no matter what; it sells.

We care! Unrealistic video games do not bother us, but a video game that is suppose to be realistic and ends up not being realistic does bother us. This is IMFDB, we are suppose to judge how realistic weapons are in media. The SkinnyWhiteGuy from the RE: Extinction discussion.

The reason why the multiplayer part is so similar to Battlefield: Bad Company is that DICE (the creator of the Battlefield series) created the multiplayer part while EA did the singleplayer part. - Kenny99 12:34, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Well yeah, if you've seen any of the trailers or behind the scenes, the EA guys tell you that. IT is still weird that they got DICE doing the multiplayer and an unknown company called "Danger Close" using the Unreal 3 Engine for the singleplayer. Excalibur01 18:55, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Dragunov

Where did it come from that the NDM-86 is in 7.62x51mm? Spartan198 10:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, wait, what ?

Look at the mag in the weapon selection screen shot. It's clearly not the Dragunov's standard mag and a straight 7.62x51mm mag. I agree with whoever did the change that it's the NDM-86. --1SAZ 13:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, i have done it. And it doesnt have anything to do with 7.62x51, its actually standart .308 winchester. --Werc 14:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Last I checked, the .308 was the civilian version of the 7.62 NATO. So in other words, it's the same round for the purposes of this discussion. Don't mean to sound rude or anything, just something to think about. --1SAZ 14:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

( Wow, so many ":" symbols ) Well, .308 is more powerfull i think. But whatever - Im glad someone agrees that NDM-86 is there. --Werc 14:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

It's the same basic round, 7.62 NATO is just loaded to a higher pressure than civilian .308, I think. But I now see what you mean about the mag. Spartan198 10:35, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of Soviet-bloc weapons, whoever labeled the AK-47 as a "Type 56" may want to check the picture where the player is looking down the sights (Hint: the front sight is not fully enclosed)

I just renamed SVD. Type 56 is someone else´s job. --Werc 17:16, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Why is the AK labeled a Type 56? it has a open sight and no pig-sticker. --FIVETWOSEVEN 20:49, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Reverted it back to AK-47. I'd like to hear the explanation as to why it was changed in the first place. --HashiriyaR32 03:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Granted there are lots of Type 56 rifles in the middle east because of the CIA, but this gun just isn't.--FIVETWOSEVEN 19:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Ugh...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38740099/ns/technology_and_science-games/

words cannot describe how incredibly stupid I think this is. Nobody makes a big fuss when the Taliban is put in a movie, but the SECOND people even THINK of putting it in a VIDEO GAME... I admit, I do see how people could take this the wrong way, but seriously... it's just a game. -- K 98.118.59.244 19:48, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

We have 'American soldiers' dying in games like Modern Warfare 2 and BC2, but no one raises a fuss. Deal with it, news outlets. BeardedHoplite 20:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

God forbid our enemy get slandered in a video game!--FIVETWOSEVEN 20:40, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

thats more political bull shit. i dont know a person in america who likes the taliban. its a game. playing as the taliban doesnt mean you like their "self-righteous" and stupid anti-american ideas. thats like saying because your playing as Spetznaz in MW2 that your being insensitive. people care when you play as talibans. but dont even mention "No Russian" Dirtdiver 6421 20:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Wait, they don't make bad press articles about Grand Theft Auto 4 when that came out and sold millions, but when it comes to a game based on real soldiers, games have crossed the line? Excalibur01 05:46, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

It gets worse than that on this side of the water; the British Defence Secretary has called for the game to be banned. Seriously. The Wierd It 08:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

JESUS Didnt you play as insurgent in MW ? Didnt you control nazi plane in all those WW flying simulators ? They are crazy. Right now, im glad that politicans are stupid in my country. Seriously, they dont even know about some MoH.

It's shocking that someone would think it acceptable to recreate the acts of the Taliban. At the hands of the Taliban, children have lost fathers and wives have lost husbands.

^^ No kidding? Same with the Nazis, and yet it's perfectly ok to play as them. There's nothing I hate more than double fucking standards. -- K 98.118.59.244 14:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

"I am disgusted and angry. It's hard to believe any citizen of our country would wish to buy such a thoroughly un-British game. I would urge retailers to show their support for our armed forces and ban this tasteless product." Let's get something straight here. I have played as Russian Spetsnaz, killing American and British soldiers. I have played as Japanese soldiers, killing American infantry. I have played as THE NAZIS, for god's sake, who not only killed Americans and British soldiers but also took part in the wholesale slaughter of the Jewish people. I have played as a Russian terrorist and mowed down an AIRPORT full of defenseless people, I have played as a drug dealing criminal with the option to kill innocents, a hitman with the option to brutally kill my targets, and yet if I get the option to play as a bunch of fucking towelheads, the game is an affront to humanity and needs to be BANNED? People need to wake the fuck up. -- K 98.118.59.244 14:26, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

It is beginning to smack of controversy for controversy's sake. The Wierd It 20:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

And now it's made its way across the pond: [3] --funkychinaman 21:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Guess who's jumped on the bandwagon and demonstrated a mile of research-fail in the process? The Wierd It 08:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

"the high level of realism makes it an effective training tool for the Taliban and other forces currently engaged with the U.S. military." >because the Taliban only uses lefty configured guns, and they happen to have ALL the next gen consoles in their holes. -- K 98.118.59.151 19:57, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

This just in; EA may or may not have caved over the issue: Clicky! The Wierd It 14:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

They caved. It's now OpFor in MultiPlayer only. So far I haven't seen anything that says it'll be changed for the single player campaign. --204.13.134.230 18:22, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Im not saying its right. by all means believe me. but its because its a hot issue. its going on now. you talk about Vietnam vets who "killed babies" no1 cares anymore. knowone cares about the brutality of or probably even knows about Somalia, Sierre Leone, Bosnia. Its because the Taliban are current. they are as we speak attempting, and trying their best, to kill American and British troops. thats why the press and dumb ass politicians think its a big deal. 24.15.103.231 22:00, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

CONFIRMED new Weapons?

This Gameplay is from Gamescom 2010. This footage confirms the F2000 , the P90 , And others (pleae watch the killfeed, VERY Closely to see the names

http://www.gamepro.com/video/gameplay/146685/medal-of-honor-gc2010-cam-gameplay/

I got two screens, one confirming weapon customization (Thankgod maybe no Gl's on all assault rifles :'] ) and one of the F2000 WITH Correct Grenade Launcher fitting (Removed handgaurd for placement) I will post more screens when i get them! I need Embedding help so if i post the links is that ok?

http://i33.tinypic.com/359zs06.png & http://i34.tinypic.com/e5fogo.png WhatARandomer 08:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

In the killfeed, there is two weapons tht are unknown to most people one is called Axe (whether we get Custom Melee weapons is uncertain) and the other is HG No full name just an abbrieviation of HG.

I recall someone mentioning that the axe was the Taliban's equivalent of the knife for multiplayer. --HashiriyaR32 19:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh yeah, the dirks use a hachet instead of a knife in the beta, kinda funny. BeardedHoplite 21:01, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

HG could be short for hand granade

Hmm could be, but I think Grenades on the killfeed appear as either GRENADE or an explosion/grenade symbol, ill rewatch the video(s) and look for any indication that HG is something other than a Hand Grenade WhatARandomer 12:50, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Updated the page with weapons seen in the new MP trailer. --HashiriyaR32 19:15, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Games in Steven Speilberg category?

Should we put all of the MoH games into the Steven Speilberg category as he's the creator of the series? - Kenny99 23:11, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Well are there any credits for Speilberg having a hand in THIS Medal of Honor game? Excalibur01 20:09, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia just says that he's the creator of the series, not a designer of the series. - Kenny99 21:19, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Sure, but did he have a hand in this one? Just because he created the series, doesn't mean he's been behind the entire series up to now. Excalibur01 02:18, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Graphical Engine for the game

I was watching a video on Medal of Honor and it stated that the single-player campaign is using the Unreal 3 Engine and the multiplayer will be using the Frostbite Engine (made famous by Bad Company). Just thought you guys would like to know! User:SeanWolf

This doesn't make sense. Why make the singleplayer with one engine and use a completely different engine for multiplayer? Excalibur01 02:21, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Old news, buddy. Maybe you should change your username to SeanSlowpoke. I keed, but not much.-protoAuthor 02:23, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey dont blame me..i just found out about that when i was watching a video about the game. Plus, i usually dont hear about video game news until the day after, so yeah. But still, yeah it doesnt make sense to use two different graphical engines for the game but who knows... User:SeanWolf

The reason for this is EA: LA are incharge of Singleplayer, and DICE are incharge of multiplayer, both using engines they're familiar with. WhatARandomer 08:05, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

SR25/M110?

I found this picture on IGN: http://pc.ign.com/dor/objects/37294/medal-of-honor-2010/images/medal-of-honor-20100915112209436.html Anyone want to confirm or deny? -Chris_Hun7er 2:32, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Why yes, yes it is.99.141.250.128 01:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

It looks an M110 SASS. --Kilo 1-1 16:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Could be an SR-25 depending on what year this took place, the M110 might not have been out at the time and it is technically the same weapon system. Excalibur01 14:46, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Getting screenshots

Hey, anyone figure out how to take screenshots in the PC version? I'm trying to get pics to replace the existing ones for the AK-47, SVD clone, and the M21. Print-screen doesn't seem to be the right key. --HashiriyaR32 02:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Download "FRAPS" or some similar utility, and use that instead. Print Screen doesn't generally work in games I'm afraid.--94.168.169.251 05:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the hint. I just uploaded a few of my own screens for the PKM and the NDM-86. EDIT: Am I the only BETA player here that's updating this page? There's gotta be at least thousands of players out there in the beta right now. --HashiriyaR32 23:42, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Didnt the beta end?

It should ending some time today. --HashiriyaR32 17:51, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Hashiriya if you plan on getting it for computer and want screen shots you should no that xfire (find it at www.xfire.com) allows you to talk and chat ingame and also take screenshots and videoos. its free and easy. it doesnt take much memory and if you want to try it as i said tis free and i believe its scroll lock x or s to take a screen pic.

AK-47 in Campaign seems to be AMD-65 ==

Hey, If you watch this guy's single player videos he eventually picks up and AK in vid 12[4]. This 'AK-47' is an AMD-65. Take a look.

Holeeey amazing sh*t. Random AK variants under AK47 ? This game is awesome.

The AKs in single-player are a mish-mash of actual AK parts. --HashiriyaR32 19:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

SR25?

I found this in the 'Friends from afar' tralier, is this the SR25? -GunGunGun

http://www.imfdb.org/images/0/0a/SR25%3F.jpg

I think it's M110 but because the M110 entered service in 2008 and the game take place in 2001-2002, it's supposed to be the SR-25 with desert camouflage. If you didn't noticed, someone else posted a comment about it, but it's OK. --RaNgeR 16:28, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh its OK is it? thanks! your very kind! --GunGunGun 18:56, 11 October 2010 (GMT)

Well when does this game take place? Excalibur01 18:06, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

The game takes place between 2001 and 2002; during the first days of the invasion to Afghanistan and during "Operation Anaconda" when the United States, NATO, non NATO and allied Afghanistan forces worked together to take down the Taliban and Al-Qaeda terror organizations and to kill/capture Osama Bin-Laden... This operation was mainly based around special operations units which we are going to play them in-game (Rangers, Special Forces and if I'm not mistaken, Navy SEALs too). As I said about the weapon: Because the game takes place around 2001 and/or 2002, it is supposed to be the SR-25 as it was issued since the '90 and the M110 only has been issued from 2008. But, because it's a game, the developers don't really mind about the exact weapons that was supposed to be used during this events. Let's take for example the MP7A1: It has been produced from 2001, but it wasn't issued in the United States nor other countries during the events of the game, but the way I see it, because it was produced from 2001 and the game takes place in 2001, so the developers decided to put the MP7A1 in even so it's not issued. --RaNgeR 21:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah- But still better than Black Ops with 2001 FAMAS in Vietnam.

The MP7 may not have been issued during that timeframe but that doesn't mean it wasn't specifically requested by SOCOM units. NMOne 02:08, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Well by all technicality, the M110 and the SR-25 are the exact same rifle with very minor differences Excalibur01 21:42, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

My understanding that the games events take place during the first three years of the war.--81.96.200.164 01:32, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

So technically unless it is stated, this rifle should be called the SR-25 Excalibur01 02:34, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Mechanically, I don't think there's any difference between the SR25 and M110. The M110 is only distinguished by its URX rail system (which newer SR25s come with today anyway) and it's length-of-pull adjustable stock (which the rifle in-game doesn't have). I agree, it should be listed as an SR25. Spartan198 11:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Switching modes of fire

Watched the First Hour on Gametrailers.com and it showed you can changed the fire mode for a weapon from semi to full auto on the fly. This is awesome Excalibur01 03:38, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Yep. All you do is simply tap the Right D-pad key and watch the bullet icon change. I did this accidentally to myself and wondered why my M4 had gone from rock n' roll to single shot. NMOne 03:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

It's awesome. I used to lightly pull the trigger for accurate single shot and now I dont have to anymore. It feels like Rainbow Six's system. Excalibur01 03:50, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

No fire selector on AKs, though (at least in SP). :( Spartan198 11:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

M203, AK, and Dragunov

The M203 in-game is actually a Cobray CM203 distinguished by it's square trigger guard. It also seems to have an M16-type safety/selector lever on the left side of the receiver (scratches head at that one).
There are at least two other AKs appearing in SP and both appear to be AMD-65s, but one is a basic run of the mill AMD while the other seems to have a perforated handguard of some kind.
I don't know about MP (haven't played yet), but the Dragunov appearing in SP is most definitely the 7.62x54R version by the magazine.

Spartan198 11:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Very much disappointed at the M203 performance, at least in SP, the range is awful and you have to hit a taliban to do some damage. MP (open beta) the range is better but grenades etc. are extremely low powered. Bullet penetration was pretty good, .223 didn't do much and 7.62x39 & x51 got kills through the Chinook wreck easy, recoil was perfect and you'd get more points playing the objective over camping for kills. MP was good and SP pretty much sucked, the only good parts in SP included a SOFLAM and some serious CAS. Chopper gunner mission was nice but the tactical situation was a bit weird, too close to the enemy for comfort. You shouldn't need to be hovering within 50 meters over the enemy when gunning in an Apache. --JEESUS 03:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

We've already ID'd the MP Dragunov as a Norinco clone in .308, but thanks for the info on the SP one. --HashiriyaR32 14:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey werc, why does the SP image for the G3 say 30+1 rounds in the weapon?--HashiriyaR32 14:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

One in the chamber, I'd assume --Chrausis 17:57, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

That wasn't my point >_>. Why does it even have anything MORE than 20+1? --HashiriyaR32 18:43, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Maybe to balance out the power they put a 20 round mag. like MW2 with the SCAR-H in MP or the FAL. or the G3 in CoD4.

Well we have a SIG 226 with 18 rounds (probably 17 round mecgar mags), a glock 19, and a m92FS in single player, the glock and beretta both at 15, whats multiplayer got, 12 round everything for "balance" since theyre so worried about people wrecking with a pistol or some crap?

Going off topic for a bit. My impressions from SP in the PS3 version with CQB controls:

1. PS3 controller sticks don't provide the resistance I'm used to.

2. Pistols fire really fast and reload real fast.

3. Lean in a console game? Interesting. I can't wait to try it for PC.

4. You can knife real fast. You can stab someone AT LEAST 3 times before they hit the ground.

--HashiriyaR32 20:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Dang, fail on my part, can't believe I forgot the G3 had a 20 round capacity >:O --Chrausis 07:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, I just played the PC version last night. A friend of mine had it and let me borrow it so I've only played the single player but not multiplayer. I finished it in 4 hours dying 8 times, 6 of them at the last section of the final mission thanks to endlessly respawning enemies. Honestly, I cleared out this little niche behind a rock, then got hit from behind. Turns out that the spot I had moved to was a place where they enemies would keep respawning. I saw one respawning as I blew the head off (literally) of another guy with a shotgun. And they need to do something about the enemy skins, as they blend into the background. Not on purpose like camouflage, more like they did it by accident by making a guy's shirt have the same texture as a rock, even though the colors are completely different. A.I. was a joke. Instead of having the allies dynamically find cover based on the terrain and location of bad guys (like Modern Warfare/MW2 and Mass Effect 2), they went to pre-chosen positions and got in your way. And I know why they let you have the 203 only on the last mission, it's caused it sucked. They apparently used bunny farts as propellant. Also, who the hell maps the switch from rifle to 203 on the left arrow key. THE LEFT ARROW KEY!! For console players that's like mapping it to a second controller. Had to map the secondary button slot to v cause I was afraid it would mess something up if I changed the primary button. And they mapped the selector to the middle mouse button and melee to x rather than, you know, the other way around. I also hate that pushing left ctrl while crouching gets you to stand up instead of going prone which you accomplish by HOLDING DOWN left ctrl. And you pickup guns by HOLDING DOWN 'f', instead of making f context sensitive. And a Ranger can carry up to 20 grenades, yet a special forces operator can only carry 3. Mind you, there was no ballistics for them so where they landed was a random guess, making them useless even without factoring the length of time it takes to throw one and it's fuse length (both unnecessarily long). The game had absoloutley no ballistics, point at a Target 1000 meters away with a .50 cal and they die without needing to adjust for distance, even when your elevation is below them, only need to account for bullet travel time which seemed arbitrary to me. Even with no ballistics, you would think the first shot would go on target, even when firing on full auto. Nope. The helicopter segment had a few interesting parts, mostly the TADS system and the Hunter Killer Mode, while the ATV section was a joke. It felt like I was riding a hovercraft over a beach instead of a four-wheeler over rough terrain. Also, the other gimmick they had was sliding to cover which I did not use at all, since it would require holding down Shift+W+Left Ctrl. I have a feeling someone spent 30 seconds figuring out where to map the buttons to and then left. At least they had the option to have sights on a toggle or switch, and leaning is mapped to 'q' and 'e' so they didn't mess that up. Anyways, in SP there were only 2 memorable points, the ending of the first Ranger mission (of which there are only two), and at the ending of the game. Overall, a very poor SP experience that did not make me want to purchase it. Sorry if I ranted for a bit, but I was looking forward to this game. Feel free to delete this part if you guys think it doesn't belong here or to move it somewhere else. --Gunkatas 20:06, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Page Split

Having played quite a bit of both campaign and multiplayer, I'm going to suggest we make two seperate articles for this game, as it it pretty much two different games bundled onto one disc. There are so many differences, including the weapons, correctness of the weapons, reloads, attachments, and overall realism that they really need to be split up. Alex T Snow 05:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Current stance is just OK. Having SP and MP category in each weap seems liek good solution :) And two pages would be pretty messy.

MoH uses China Airsoft Aimpoint

Anyone notice - while the original Swedish Aimpoint only has a red dot in various brightness settings on a Red dot, the one used in Medal of Honor are clearly a China Clone with Red and Green Dot.

Well, still better than Black Ops with its Romanian AK´s in hands of both Vietcong and Russian army or FAMAS from 2001 in Vietnam.

They model the guns pretty much off of just airsoft guns. They buy the expensive ones in which I still don't understand why they don't just buy real ones,Alot of times the airsoft guns are the same price as the real ons.--FIVETWOSEVEN 17:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

SAW

Is that a magazine well beneath the ammo belt on the SAW in those pics? Wouldn't that make it an M249 rather than a Mark 46? Spartan198 03:24, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

M60E3 or M60E4?

Hello, everyone! Just curiosity: why is it a M60E3, not an E4? Thanks!

Some corrections

I've noticed the page has a few guns misidentified, some possibily due to anonymous users making all-wise changes. The SIG P226 used by Rabbit is the newer model P226R, you can see the rail under the frame. The MK 46 is an M249 like it's identified in SP, the magazine well under the belt feed is the indicator, as the MK 46 isn't fed by box magazines. The M60E3 appears to be an M60E4, the barrel is rather short, and it has the rail and removeable foregrip, so I believe it's the M60E4/Mk. 43 Mod 1. - Gunmaster45

And some dumbass comments here and there. -Winchester

The Glock is a 17, not a 19. The picture needs to be changed but I don't know how.--FIVETWOSEVEN 17:25, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

It is a Glock 19, as the magazine capacity is only 15 rounds, which is the standard (flush) magazine capacity for a Glock 19. Additionally, Glock 19s are commonly carried by AFO personnel. They quite often receive non-standard weaponry (such as the HK-416 and others such weapons) because it is more important that what they have work under the most extreme conditions and due to their elite status, they are given more leeway in their loadouts. Look closly next time you see some SOF personnel in the media or whereever you might catch a glimpse (espiecially SFOD-D) and you will see they are packing more unique equipment then your normal soldier or Marine, including Glocks.SAWGunner89 23:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

YOu are correct. I just examined the screen shots in the article and that is a Glock 17, however, the mag capacity is still that of a Glock 19. Wierd that they would go through the trouble of doing a decent model of the firearm and then screw up on the mag capacity, but I guess it is just bad research. I added a small section stating a boiled down version of what I stated here in the article so that it may be noted.SAWGunner89 23:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

How is it not a Glock 22 then? I've seen them with tan frames...

Mk.18 variant

The Mk.18 variant in the game is actually a Mod.1. You can tell by the free-floating rails and the forward, folding BUIS. This is indicative of the Mod.1 variant, as it does not have the front sight mounted on the gas block.SAWGunner89 23:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not so sure; the RIS looks like the normal KAC RIS used on the Mod.0, and aftermarket gasblocks with integrated folding iron sights aren't exactly rare.The Wierd It 17:46, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Nope, it has a KAC RIS, making it a Mod 0. The FSB is just replaced by a low-profile gas block which can be seen in-game by dropping the weapon and taking a close look at it. The BUIS is mounted on the RIS. Spartan198 20:03, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

More specifically, it looks like the gas block is one of these, or something similar.The Wierd It 15:25, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

An interesting little tidbit I've noticed regarding Rabbit's Mark 18 and M4. When viewed in his hands during use, both have the same gas block and rail-mounted front BUIS. When dropped and looked at on the ground, the Mark 18 retains these modifications. But when you drop the M4, the gas block and BUIS are replaced with a standard FSB. Spartan198 17:13, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Got a copy of this on the cheap, and noticing silliness...

For a start, the PKM has a dust cover that moves but has nothing underneath it; no ejection port, just the side of the gun. But more obviously, if you've got this, play the mission with the AC130 Reaper 31 in it and watch Reaper carefully after it completes it's run. The AC-130 model is clearly only a few hundred yards from the player and about the size of a car. Yay, air support from toy planes! Vangelis 15:04, 9 March 2011 (MSK)

Multiplayer guns

What guns in this game are multiplayer only? I know the P90 is one, but are there any others? - User:1morey May 2, 2011 8:46 PM (EST)

M16A4, F2000/GL1, RPK, TOZ-194, M21, NDM-86, M24, SV-98, AT4, RPG-7, GP-25, MP-443, C4, and IED are MP only. Spartan198 14:19, 8 May 2011 (CDT)

Actually, the RPG-7 is in the singleplayer (It is the very first level that was daylight, the one where you used that scope thing to target the tanks and vehicles.), the GP-25 I swore I saw on an AK on one occasion, and C4 I think is used in the campaign. - User:1morey May 8, 2011 6:23 PM

No, the GP-25 is MP only. Believe me, I play SP religiously. Spartan198 23:32, 26 June 2011 (CDT)

The SAW is not a Mark 46!

Look beneath the ammo belt, you can clearly see a magazine well for inserting M16 magazines. The Mark 46 does not have this magazine well! This is an M249E3 paratrooper model with a fixed buttstock. Spartan198 02:00, 13 June 2011 (CDT)

So it is, nice catch :) Alex T Snow 02:35, 13 June 2011 (CDT)

An old catch, too. It had been changed from Mark 46 to M249 a while back, but I checked the page for something that day and noticed it had been reverted back to Mark 46. My guess is that somebody changed it going by the short barrel, rail system (which is of the type used on the Mark 46), and fixed buttstock, a combination which understandably makes it look like a Mark 46 to the untrained eye. Spartan198 23:30, 26 June 2011 (CDT)

Please help with these weapons!

I need help with these guns:

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Seen in SP mounted on several tanks.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Multiplayer reward for killing with pistols.

Whoever you are, thank you in advance! - bozitojugg3rn4ut 16:15, 15 June 2011 (CDT)

The top one is a DShK in an anti-aircraft mount:

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

DShKM heavy machine gun in standard vehicle mounting on a Romanian TR-85 main battle tank - 12.7x108mm

I don't know about the second, but this page also needs to have the M230 chain guns on the Apaches added. Evil Tim 23:32, 1 October 2011 (CDT)

Sequel on the way

So a sequel is coming out for Medal of Honor what guns do you guy think will be in it? --GVK2009 22:19, 16 June 2011 (CDT)GVK2009

Probably the same more or less with a few additions. - Mr. Wolf 00:23, 17 June 2011 (CDT)

???

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

?

It's missing a baseplate. --Funkychinaman 14:03, 7 November 2011 (CST)

Help would be appreciated. - bozito

Some sort of BTR. But it appears that BTR-60s, 70's and 80's all carried KPVT 14.5mm machine guns main gun and a PKT secondary gun. --Funkychinaman 14:03, 7 November 2011 (CST)

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Plus, I am not sure about the GAU-8. The player can "use" it, but it is never seen on-screen.

You see the A-10s fly over before you enter the building you attack the control tower from. Evil Tim 05:39, 8 November 2011 (CST)

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

?

ZU-23-2. Evil Tim 05:39, 8 November 2011 (CST)

Here is a better pic of that unknown BTR.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Based on the location of the doors, I'll say BTR-60. --Funkychinaman 15:01, 9 November 2011 (CST)

+ can anyone tell me what the hell is mounted on the top of the Bradley?

25mm M242 Bushmaster chain gun, M240C coax, TOW missiles --Funkychinaman 15:01, 9 November 2011 (CST)

--bozitojugg3rn4ut 05:22, 9 November 2011 (CST)

ANother mortar from the MP

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

?

bozito

Looks like a 60mm to me. That'd make it an M224. Spartan198 14:46, 9 November 2011 (CST)

It looks a bit big for 60mm. Plus, the M224 has that "grip" near the base. M29 81mm mortar? --Funkychinaman 15:09, 9 November 2011 (CST)

The grip is IIRC the firing handle and incorporates the trigger. This looks more like an M29 or even an M2. Could you get an image of the baseplate so we can see the shape? Evil Tim 09:56, 3 December 2011 (CST)

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

That weird SAW again

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

This is the same Mk 46 Mod 0 / SAW hybrid that's in BF3 and MW3. I'm starting to wonder if it isn't actually a real thing. Evil Tim 00:46, 21 November 2011 (CST)

I think none of them are hybrids. They are let's say 90% SAWs and 10% Mk46s. If I am correct, the Mk46's handguard can be installed on an M249, but adding a STANAG well on an Mk46 would be much harder.

Take a look at the SCAR-L in Alpha Protocol; it has ejection port cover and HK-style selector pictographs, but is not a SCAR/AR-15/HK416 hybrid. Or we could say that almost every gun in Soldier of Fortune: Payback is a hybrid of two or even more guns mixed together. Video games like to "combine" two or more guns to get more cooler designs. Rarely even movies do. - bozitojugg3rn4ut 02:38, 21 November 2011 (CST)

Yeah, I wouldn't find it odd if only MW3 had done it, but BF3 and MoH are rather less about the cool fantasy guns and more about things that actually exist somewhere. And for this same odd variant to turn up in three different games leaves me wondering if there aren't actual SAWs with Mk46 handguards out there, and if so, if this version has a name / designation of its own. Evil Tim 02:44, 21 November 2011 (CST)

The results for Googling up "M249 SAW with Mk46 handguard" are airsoft guns. It is possible that the devs used airsoft guns to model their weapons. On the other hand, I think the MoH team was working with the most reliable military advisors and war veterans, and if they were cool with this SAW, so should we. Some games show the M4 with non-stepped a barrel (Hitman, Kane & Lynch, even MoH). A SAW with an Mk46/48 handguard is the same. (And the SAW in MoH even has a carry handle. Who the hell would install a carry handle onto his Mk46?) - bozitojugg3rn4ut 03:02, 21 November 2011 (CST)

The Mod 1 variants of both the Mark 46 and Mark 48 actually do have carry handles. [5] Spartan198 18:54, 21 November 2011 (CST)

I know, I could accept if it wasn't real (and that the BF3 team might have got the idea from the MoH dev team, so it's not that odd in those two). It's just particularly odd for two rival franchises to invent the same hybrid gun, like if I saw the same seemingly made-up animal in two completely seperate games I'd wonder if it wasn't just something real I wasn't familiar with. Evil Tim 03:11, 21 November 2011 (CST)

As an airsofter, as far as I know any airsoft gun listed as a Mk 46 is actually the MOH/BF3 M249, as they have carry handles and mag wells. Putting a Mk 46 rail system on an M249E2 isn't any different than putting a KAC rail system on an M4A1, that's just seen as normal. Rail systems are rail systems, it's just an aftermarket part, not a hybrid. Alex T Snow 22:59, 21 November 2011 (CST)

Yeah, I'm with Alex here. There isn't anything weird or "hybrid" about this SAW, it's just an M249 para model with a Mark 46 rail system. Spartan198 09:00, 22 November 2011 (CST)

That is something weird about it. What I'm asking is if it's a real variant of some kind with an actual name or just an "X with a Y" frankengun. Both the others are actual hybrids with multiple features from both weapons; eg the one in BF3 also has a short barrel (which would make it a para version) and a full stock (which would make it a Mk 46 with the short barrel) but a STANAG magwell (which makes it, um, nothing). Evil Tim 09:10, 22 November 2011 (CST)

The Mark 46 has a short barrel as standard and an M249 Para with a fixed stock is just an M249 Para with a fixed stock. The mixing and matching of some components doesn't change anything. The only way it could be a true hybrid is if the receiver lacked a magazine well and had a vehicle mounting lug (though in that case one could argue it's just a mis-calibered Mark 48) or vice versa, since both the mag well and lug are removed from the receiver of a Mark 46 to reduce weight. This is effectively just an M249 Para standing in for a Mark 46. Spartan198 09:39, 22 November 2011 (CST)

You misread: with a stock and a short barrel it would make it a Mk 46 in terms of real-life configurations, since the Para SAW doesn't have a fixed stock (that's part of what makes it a Para SAW; you might as well say it's an M249-E2 with a short barrel even though one of the distinctive features of the M249-E2 is that it doesn't have a short barrel). What makes it a hybrid is that it has a series of features which are distinctive of multiple different versions of the weapon.

No, I read it right, you just aren't getting what I'm saying. Lacking a magazine well and vehicle mounting lug makes it a Mark 46 in terms of real life configuration, since stocks and barrels can be swapped out between different Minimi/M249 variants. The Minimi isn't like the AR-15 platform where doing something as simple as changing out a barrel with one that's longer or shorter makes it analogous to one of a different model. Spartan198 10:34, 22 November 2011 (CST)

I'm not buying that. You can't say "this is a Mk 46 Mod 0 / Para SAW with some other bits and pieces from other variants thrown on" and then argue this does not make the configuration a hybrid in the truest sense of the term. Anyway, this isn't particularly relevant. Evil Tim 12:01, 22 November 2011 (CST)

This has got ridiculously sidetracked. What I want to know is if this setup (Mk46 rails, full stock, STANAG magwell) is a real configuration of the weapon with an actual name (like, say, "Para" being the name for a short-barrel version with a collapsable stock) or just a made-up one. Evil Tim 09:48, 22 November 2011 (CST)

In a broad sense, yeah, just made up. An M249 Para with a fixed stock and rail system to make it look like a Mark 46. Same principle as dressing up an FN MAG to look like an M240 or a Daewoo K3 to look like an M249. Spartan198 10:34, 22 November 2011 (CST)

So, just an odd coincidence / devs copying each other? Evil Tim 12:01, 22 November 2011 (CST)

Most likely they all wanted the most recent version of the M249, which is the Mk 46, but made the mistake of modeling them after airsoft "Mk 46"s, which are, just like these, still M249s. That's my guess. Alex T Snow 16:07, 22 November 2011 (CST)

Look what I found.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

I guess that settles it, the M249 Para with Mk 46 bits is called an airsoft gun. Evil Tim 16:12, 22 November 2011 (CST)

Ta Daaaa! Alex T Snow 16:30, 22 November 2011 (CST)

Yeah, save for the Crane stock, that's exactly what we have here. Spartan198 17:31, 30 November 2011 (CST)

G3A3

The receiver of the G3A3 says: "Kal. .308". Is that correct? I mean, I thought HK uses the "7.62x51mm" marking on their guns. - bozitojugg3rn4ut 13:28, 30 November 2011 (CST)

Civilian G3 variant maybe? Alex T Snow 13:57, 30 November 2011 (CST)

Where on the reciver did it state the caliber? I'm asking because G3 rifles do not have caliber markings on the side of the weapon. I'm currently looking at both German and Greek manufactured models. Most European firearms would be marked 7.62(at minimum) someplace not the american .308 markings.Rockwolf66 14:47, 30 November 2011 (CST)

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Here

--bozitojugg3rn4ut 14:54, 30 November 2011 (CST)

Quickly checking HKpro indicates that the reciver should be marked "Cal 7.62X51" on a properly marked G3A3. This seems to confirm that they used a civilian copy as the model. Rockwolf66 14:59, 30 November 2011 (CST)

So maybe they used an American civilian variant (maybe got it from a film armorer) to model it? At least they knew that it should have a mag release paddle. --bozitojugg3rn4ut 15:31, 30 November 2011 (CST)

Well it says SACO too, and a quick seach shows that SACO is an American importer of HK41s. So it's a proper G3A3, but with HK41 trademarks. Props to DICE for adding the mag release :) Alex T Snow 15:41, 30 November 2011 (CST)

Not DICE, Danger Close. Dice did the multiplayer only.-protoAuthor 23:03, 30 November 2011 (CST)

Oops, right, forgot :/ Alex T Snow 02:43, 1 December 2011 (CST)

You forgot that SP and MP had different engines? :P --Masterius 01:15, 2 December 2011 (CST)

In the moment of writing that, I guess I did. I think I played something like two hours of MP though, it's really just a singleplayer game to me :P Alex T Snow 16:36, 2 December 2011 (CST)

Okay, so I managed to unlock the G3 in the MP finally. (Damn, I hate sniping!) You can see on the page that it lacks the mag-release paddle, but has a SEF trigger group. I'm not really sure how to call it, as the world-model and class icons have the paddle correctly, but the receiver markings say "HK 91". I could be wrong, but I think the trigger groups are interchangeable, so it could be a HK91A2 with SEF trigger group. The world-model and class icons are G3s, so it could look weird that the 1stPer and 3rdPer models are listed separately. Help would be appreciated. - bozitojugg3rn4ut 12:48, 5 December 2011 (CST)

AK47

Sorry, but how is the AK in the game an AKM? It has the stock and barrel of an AK47. so how is it an AKM? --Gunner5

I presume it's labeled going by the receiver, but someone more familiar with the AK will have to confirm. Spartan198 21:08, 30 November 2011 (CST)

Yes, check the receiver. AK-47 should have milled one and AKM should have stamped one[6] --Masterius 01:22, 2 December 2011 (CST)

Small fixes

Just went over the page and made some spelling and other fixes. The EOTech in the game was identified as a 556, but this is wrong. The model used is a 552. Also fixed some incorrect capitalization (every instance of the word "holographic" was capitalized when it shouldn't be) and removed the incorrect notation about the MP7A1 in the SP campaign being full-auto only (it most definitely isn't). Spartan198 01:45, 1 December 2011 (CST)

With the MP7 I meant that the selector stays on auto all the time. Looks like I had some problems expressing myself. :) --bozitojugg3rn4ut 00:22, 2 December 2011 (CST)

Bradley ?!

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

What the hell is the gun on the top? - bozitojugg3rn4ut 08:46, 3 December 2011 (CST)

I believe it's supposed to be an M2 Browning. All the armour in Bad Company used a similar weird little RWS, even Russian and MEC vehicles.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Evil Tim 08:52, 3 December 2011 (CST)

Yeah, the Browning was on my mind too. I will get some other, detailed caps and upload them. --bozitojugg3rn4ut 09:46, 3 December 2011 (CST)

Hybrid AK

Should we classify the AK's as hybrid AK's? the reason is because they are all combos of different AK's.--gunner5

M16A4 or M16A3 or R0901

According to Colt, the full-auto M16A4 is the R0901 or Model 901 or M901 or M16A3. The A4 should be changed to one of these, because according to the rules. we should name weapons based on how they look or behave, not how the creators call them. What do you think? - bozitojugg3rn4ut 13:16, 7 January 2012 (CST)

I believe the policy is never to identiy guns as M16A3s, as they are pretty much allways intended to be M16A2s or A4s (there are two different guns both designated the A3, one with A2 sights and the other with a flattop) and are just depicted with the wrong firing mode. Also the US army M16A4 is designated the Model 945, 901 is the export model (don't think there are any differeances, is just a different designation). --commando552 16:41, 7 January 2012 (CST)

Yeah, the policy says that about the M16A3, but that is because in movies they all go "rock-n-roll". It think this rule is kinda "stupid". For example in films like Far Cry (2009) the mercs are using full-auto M16s with flat-tops. IMFDb calls them A4s but how do we know that those are A4s. I mean, is that impossible that mercenaries would use the full-auto M16A3s? (I never understood why would anyone want a gun with a 0-1-3 selector but that is an other question.) Or S.H.I.E.L.D. guards in Thor. They could also M16A3s. (Of course it is hard to tell if they are not firing them. Obviously in films with US Army those are standing in for the A4s.) Some organizations must use the A3s otherwise Colt would not offer them, right? - bozitojugg3rn4ut 18:21, 7 January 2012 (CST)

I always though (and someone who knows more about this feel free to correct me) that the majority of movie M16A4s were likely to be a civilian semi automatic rifle with the lower receiver either modified to full automatic or the entire lower swapped for a full auto one. Bear in mind, the M16A3 is only used by the US Navy, and limited use at that, so it is pretty unlikely that one is ever used in a film. Sure, in the Marvel universe SHIELD might issue their guards with the M16A3, but it is very unlikely that the actual rifles used were genuine M16A3s. In my opinion it is just easier to call the rifles A2 or A4 rather than guessing as to whether they are an A3. --commando552 18:47, 7 January 2012 (CST)

I think the point that myself and others have been trying to make on this site is, while A3s in real life (movies & TV) are never A3s becuase there are only a few and only SEALs have them (they're other things converted), in games (or anime, etc) they are whatever they're intended to be. In a movie about the Army or Marines we would say "M16A4s converted to full auto, which is inaccurate for real life, as A4s are burst", but in a game, like this, COD4 singleplayer, or BF3, they are actually M16A3s, and we should say "M16A3s, which are inaccurate for real life, as they should be using A4s, which are the same, but are burst". Alex T Snow 19:16, 7 January 2012 (CST)

SEALs aren't the only ones that use A3s... The CB Reserve unit a buddy of mine is in are issued A3s. I'd say that the A3 is just Navy specific.-Ranger01 20:51, 7 January 2012 (CST)

Oh, okay, didn't know that :) Alex T Snow 21:07, 7 January 2012 (CST)

What I wanted to say is that the M16 page should have an M16A3 section, at least for the video games that feature them. Quickly checked the M16 page there is at least 4 games with M16A3 rifles (two with A2 sights ID as an "M16A2 with incorrect full-auto fire mode", two with flat-top. There could be even more.) - bozitojugg3rn4ut 03:37, 8 January 2012 (CST)

And the "A4s with incorrect full auto mode" Alex T Snow 17:05, 8 January 2012 (CST)

This "we should say "M16A3s, which are inaccurate for real life, as they should be using A4s, which are the same, but are burst"" reminds me of how popular it is to depict regular US Army and USMC servicemen using M4A1 (full auto) Carbine...

Having section for M16A3 would be nice. --Masterius 12:42, 9 January 2012 (CST)

Medal of Honor: Warfighter

Yeah!!! Medal of Honor: Warfighter is the confirmed name of the sequel, powered by the Frostbite 2 engine. Now here's a task for you folks: give a detailed analysis of the weapon on the art :) --Masterius 13:53, 25 February 2012 (CST)

An M4 variant (can't tell which one) with a Magpul CTR stock with some kind of cheek rest I've never seen, Magpul PMag, Troy BUIS, and a Trijicon TA01DOC ACOG, and a rail system I can't identify because of so little that's seen. Edit: It also seems to have a LaRue Tactical lower receiver. Spartan198 14:09, 25 February 2012 (CST)

It's also got clip-type rail covers. I'll put in the proper name when I find it.The Wierd It 15:54, 25 February 2012 (CST)

EDIT: LaRue Index Clips. I think.The Wierd It 16:02, 25 February 2012 (CST)

Actually, could be base gun be an OBR 5.56? The Wierd It 16:04, 25 February 2012 (CST)

The rifle is a LaRue Tactical OBR 5.56 fitted with a CTR stock with RISR (Reciprocating Inline Stock Riser) and POD (Prone Optimization Device). You can see more of the handguard in the larger image and it is fitted with LaRue Grip Adapter Panels. --commando552 17:40, 25 February 2012 (CST)

Interesting... So should this weapon appear in actual game with the highly-visible LARUE Logo on lower receiver, it can be confirmed to be product placement of LaRue Tactical. --Masterius 08:07, 26 February 2012 (CST)

Is that a dig at something? You can have product placement without oversized logos, you know. The Wierd It 08:44, 26 February 2012 (CST)

I believe it's Masterius being his usual passive-aggressive self. Evil Tim 08:47, 26 February 2012 (CST)

Oh. I thought it was a dig at Modern Warfare 3's massive Remington logos. The Wierd It 08:54, 26 February 2012 (CST)

I believe it's more a dig at an argument I had yesterday, specifically my pointing out that HK wasn't a major sponsor of MW3 because their logo only appears on one weapon (the suppressed version of the MW3 USP) and it's hidden except when reloading (meaning it probably isn't supposed to be there either). The big logos on the weapons from Remington, the Leupold trades on scopes and the EOTech logos indicate that Activision made deals to advertise those companies. With HK, they probably had to pay them money just to include them, and certainly didn't have any deal to prominently feature their logo. Evil Tim 08:59, 26 February 2012 (CST)

That's paranoia.

Anyway, yes, there are different ways of product placement: some are more obvious, some are less. --Masterius 10:36, 26 February 2012 (CST)

No, it's having the remotest ability to recognise a pattern given you do this all the time (I've noticed these snide little digs ever since you lost that argument about SVUs) and think I'm too stupid to notice. And there's a difference between a work simply containing a product and having a deal with the manufacturer to advertise that product and feature their logo prominently. Evil Tim 10:53, 26 February 2012 (CST)

You just love to remind you have the admin powers, don't you? This kind of argument leads nowhere.

There is a difference between a product and its associated names which I've written at the bottom of this particular discussion. --Masterius 11:24, 26 February 2012 (CST)

Modern warfare 3 added in massive Remington logos where they shouldn't be though making it obvious product placement. If the LaRue Tactical OBR was in the game with the big logo on the magazine well, that would just be correct modelling as that is how it is in real life. --commando552 09:22, 26 February 2012 (CST)

Could be. But the manufacturing company might sue the publisher for unauthorised use of their name, which is why they tend to be replaced (on weapon) and omitted (from weapon's name). --Masterius 10:36, 26 February 2012 (CST)

I realise that, was just pointing out that the fact that they added in logos where they shouldn't be in MW3 just made it blatantly obvious it was going on, rather than retaining correct logos. I wouldn't care if this gun turned up in game with the big LaRue Tactical markings on the lower receiver as these are correct, but the Remington markings in MW3 annoyed me. --commando552 11:45, 26 February 2012 (CST)

Yes, the MW3 case is just egregious. --Masterius 12:06, 26 February 2012 (CST)

The white smoke grenade used in Breaking Bagram

The M18 only comes in red, green, yellow, and violet. White smoke would makes it an AN/M8 or M83. Spartan198 (talk) 17:53, 15 September 2012 (EDT)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+==Remington M24 a fake==
+Has anyone else noticed that the M24 in the game is in fact a Savage Model 10FCPXP rifle? And on top of that, the same rifle appears re-skinned as the M40 in Battlefield: Bad Company 2 Vietnam, albeit with a different scope?--[[User:GLOCK10mil|GLOCK10mil]] 21:01, 8 August 2011 (CDT)
+==Missing weapons: Heavy Weapons In Singleplayer and Explosives Multiplayer==
+For the sake of being a complete guide there are still some weapons missing.  The weapons I notice missing from this list include the emplaced weapons: The ZU-23 Anti-Aircraft gun which is seen in both singleplayer and multiplayer as an unusable model. The DShK heavy machine gun which appears in singleplayer on a shielded tripod mount and in "Breaking Bagram" as a technical mounted weapon that is used momentarily by the player. The explosives in the multiplayer game and their detonators deserve a separate mention as well (the C4 and IED respectively). The C4 is also used once in "Dorthy's a Bitch" in singleplayer. The SOFLAM in singleplayer may also be mentioned if it counts. The mortar used by the Taliban in the singleplayer game is pretty generic but might use a mention.
+P.S. I would include them myself but I need to find a way to take screenshots via my PS3. Is there software to do this? [[User:Maphisto86|Maphisto86]] 07:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
+==Glock 19, tan Frame?==
+That frame looks tan. Not OD at all.
+Its definately tan, I'm also pretty sure its a glock 17, my TV is low def but I'm sure its says 17.
+Don't need to see the number to see that its a 17, its grip says all.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:30, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
+Glock classified it's frames as OD, not tan. Take it up with Glock.
+is it possible its a Glock 22? it would make sense with the ammo count. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 19:25, 3 April 2011 (CDT)
+I completely agree it's a Glock 22. I do way more damage with it.
+==Missing weapons==
+[[Glock 19]], Deuce's sidearm both suppressed and unsuppressed.
+[[DShK]], which you have to suppress in the first Ranger mission.
 ==Any screenshots of "new sidearms"==
 So we can add to main page?
+-Yeah, I hear there's a Glock, but I have yet to see it.--[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 15:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
+It's in any level that you play as Duece. I'd take screenshots, but my camera sucks and I only have the 360 version of the game.--[[User:1SAZ|1SAZ]] 16:10, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
+What model is it? I've heard 19.--[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 16:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
+It's a 19. 15+1 cap
+I don't get the game until tomorrow (ready for a whole weekend of no work!) and if it hasn't been added, I'll see if I can get some pictures up.--[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 09:25, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
+I'm just about done with the Airfield mission, so I'll be getting shots of Deuce's Glock 19 soon.--[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 19:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 ==New Sidearms confirmed!==
@@ Line 9: / Line 44: @@
 And someone we havent seen named Rabbit Has a Sig. Navy Seal im guessing
-"When you play as "Rabbit" you carry a Sig. When you play as "Deuce" you carry a Glock. And when you are Dante Adams you carry the M9. These weapons can never be dropped, never run out of ammunition, and are an integral part of each character’s identity. The variety in these side arms is also intended to help give distinction and personality to each of the characters represented in "Neptune", "Wolfpack" and 1/75th Ranger"
+"When you play as "Rabbit" you carry a Sig which looks like it has night sights.. When you play as "Deuce" you carry a Glock. And when you are Dante Adams you carry the M9. These weapons can never be dropped, never run out of ammunition, and are an integral part of each character’s identity. The variety in these side arms is also intended to help give distinction and personality to each of the characters represented in "Neptune", "Wolfpack" and 1/75th Ranger"
 :I have two things to say about that. One, I'm happy I wont have to look at an M9 throughout the campaign. Two, I hope they allow you to pick which pistol you use in mp since it'd effectively wouldn't change the balance at all. Just allow more individualism to the players. Did I mention I'm really tired of seeing the M9 in my games?
 ::Forgive Beretta if they've created one of the most successful pistols of all time, and it happens to be used by the U.S. military. So...I think either you should go design a new gun to replace it, or just live with it. Unless of course you want them to have the U.S. standard sidearm be an HK P30 just to be 'original'.
@@ Line 37: / Line 72: @@
 ==Possible 1911==
 Settle an argument for me lads. Picture below, Possible 1911 if the standard Taliban Grach? [http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/hs544.ash1/31810_408238329053_135747814053_4185509_6821919_n.jpg] I doubt we can go by bore aperture on this one.--[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 00:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
+Looks like the Grach, doesn't have the distinct look of a 1911's muzzle.
 ==Knife?==
@@ Line 44: / Line 81: @@
 I prefer it to have ALL weapons listed its interesting and gives more content.
 :''In that case, list it here in the discussion page when the game releases.  A great example of this is the page for 2004's The Punisher.  GM45 (I think it was him) took great care to screencap the variety of knives that movie had and list them there (among other things).  But he left the main body of the page for the guns, which is why people come to this website.'' --[[User:Clutch|Clutch]] 22:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
+::It is a member's CHOICE to add non-firearm weapons for trivia purposes. As long as the added blades or other weapons are well documented and the page does not consist entirely of non-firearms, it's perfectly fine. They're in a gray area, like explosives (grenades and C4 aren't firearms yet we document them) and improvised weapons (like the drill in Tomb Raider). - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]
 ==beta release date?==
@@ Line 158: / Line 196: @@
 but really, i no Delta is more of a mission specific unit, but seriously what is America's best military asset? 1stSFOD-D. why? because they have close to 500 Operators, the best in the world. and officially they dont exist. political bull shit in the way, no problemo. they dont exist. its denieble if you send them in.[[Special:Contributions/71.194.219.9|71.194.219.9]] 19:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
+Ok let me straightin this out just a bit. Ragnar is correct about what they say but somethings are a bit off. First, 1st SFOD-D and SEALs are not exactly the same. The Navy's equivalent of 1st SFOD-D(Delta, or the DODs name for them CAG[Combat Applications Group]) is DEVGRU( Naval Special Warfare Development Group, more commonly known as SEAL Team Six), yes they are SEALs but they serve a different purpose. Second, you are right about the purpose of Ranger's, besides the fact that a select few have been sent on small team missions(4 to 12). The 75th Ranger Regiment is the highest for of Ranger special operations beside a certain few Task Force's they have been added to. Delta, DEVGRU, SAD, and SOG are among the designated, "Tier 1" units in the U.S.
+:SOG is a ''part'' of SAD, and SAD is a component of the CIA, not SOCOM, and hence isn't classified anywhere on the SOF Tier System. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:25, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+SOG maybe a part of SAD but they are considered seperate due their overall mission and each of them recruit completely seperate form the other. One being apart of covert political actions and the other(SOG)being the "boots on the ground" paramilitary operators. And because of their training, where their operators originate and their very close knit relationship with USSOCOM they are considered "Tier One".[[User:Puppet.of.fate|Puppet.of.fate]] 02:03, 29 February 2012 (CST)
+:Rangers have a close knit relationship with Delta, but that doesn't make them a tier 1 SMU. SAD isn't a USSOCOM component, it's CIA. The CIA isn't a USSOCOM component, so SAD doesn't have a tier classification. A given unit has to be a USSOCOM component in order to be classified as such. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:51, 29 February 2012
+It isn't stated anywhere that Teir One units are designated only to USSOCOM. 1st SFOD-d, DEVGRU, 24th STS, and ISA are USSOCOM's designated SMU, SAD is the CIA's SMU. SAD operator's are comprised of former 1st SFOD-D, DEVGRU, SF, Ranger's and so on. Oh and something wiki doesn't tell you is there are at least two more SMU's out there that remain unnamed. Oh another thing, a lot of CIA/NSA black ops units are considered SMU's because of the missions they receive.[[User:Puppet.of.fate|Puppet.of.fate]] 04:24, 29 February 2012 (CST)
 == Guns revealed in multi-player demo at E3 ==
@@ Line 385: / Line 433: @@
 According to the Walkthrough trailor for the first mission this is CQB-R verzion of the M4A1.
+:Yes, we know that ''now''. Keep in mind that my above post is dated August 2010, which was about 3 months ''before'' the game's release. There was no walkthrough to tell that at the time. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:18, 7 November 2011 (CST)
 ==Unimpressed....==
@@ Line 424: / Line 474: @@
 We care! Unrealistic video games do not bother us, but a video game that is suppose to be realistic and ends up not being realistic does bother us. This is IMFDB, we are suppose to judge how realistic weapons are in media. The SkinnyWhiteGuy from the RE: Extinction discussion.
+:The reason why the multiplayer part is so similar to Battlefield: Bad Company is that DICE (the creator of the Battlefield series) created the multiplayer part while EA did the singleplayer part. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 12:34, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
+::Well yeah, if you've seen any of the trailers or behind the scenes, the EA guys tell you that. IT is still weird that they got DICE doing the multiplayer and an unknown company called "Danger Close" using the Unreal 3 Engine for the singleplayer. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:55, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 == Dragunov ==
@@ Line 557: / Line 609: @@
 : Holeeey amazing sh*t. Random AK variants under AK47 ? This game is awesome.
+The AKs in single-player are a mish-mash of actual AK parts. --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 19:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 == SR25? ==
@@ Line 602: / Line 656: @@
 [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
+:Very much disappointed at the M203 performance, at least in SP, the range is awful and you have to hit a taliban to do some damage. MP (open beta) the range is better but grenades etc. are extremely low powered. Bullet penetration was pretty good, .223 didn't do much and 7.62x39 & x51 got kills through the Chinook wreck easy, recoil was perfect and you'd get more points playing the objective over camping for kills. MP was good and SP pretty much sucked, the only good parts in SP included a SOFLAM and some serious CAS. Chopper gunner mission was nice but the tactical situation was a bit weird, too close to the enemy for comfort. You shouldn't need to be hovering within 50 meters over the enemy when gunning in an Apache. --[[User:JEESUS|JEESUS]] 03:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 We've already ID'd the MP Dragunov as a Norinco clone in .308, but thanks for the info on the SP one. --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 14:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
+Hey werc, why does the SP image for the G3 say 30+1 rounds in the weapon?--[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 14:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
+One in the chamber, I'd assume --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 17:57, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
+That wasn't my point >_>.  Why does it even have anything MORE than 20+1? --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 18:43, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
+Maybe to balance out the power they put a 20 round mag. like MW2 with the SCAR-H in MP or the FAL. or the G3 in CoD4.
+Well we have a SIG 226 with 18 rounds (probably 17 round mecgar mags), a glock 19, and a m92FS in single player, the glock and beretta both at 15, whats multiplayer got, 12 round everything for "balance" since theyre so worried about people wrecking with a pistol or some crap?
+Going off topic for a bit.  My impressions from SP in the PS3 version with CQB controls:
+. PS3 controller sticks don't provide the resistance I'm used to.
+. Pistols fire really fast and reload real fast.
+. Lean in a console game?  Interesting.  I can't wait to try it for PC.
+. You can knife real fast.  You can stab someone AT LEAST 3 times before they hit the ground.
+--[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 20:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
+Dang, fail on my part, can't believe I forgot the G3 had a 20 round capacity >:O --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 07:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
+Well, I just played the PC version last night.  A friend of mine had it and let me borrow it so I've only played the single player but not multiplayer.  I finished it in 4 hours dying 8 times, 6 of them at the last section of the final mission thanks to endlessly respawning enemies.  Honestly, I cleared out this little niche behind a rock, then got hit from behind.  Turns out that the spot I had moved to was a place where they enemies would keep respawning.  I saw one respawning as I blew the head off (literally) of another guy with a shotgun.  And they need to do something about the enemy skins, as they blend into the background.  Not on purpose like camouflage, more like they did it by accident by making a guy's shirt have the same texture as a rock, even though the colors are completely different.  A.I. was a joke.  Instead of having the allies dynamically find cover based on the terrain and location of bad guys (like Modern Warfare/MW2 and Mass Effect 2), they went to pre-chosen positions and got in your way.  And I know why they let you have the 203 only on the last mission, it's caused it sucked.  They apparently used bunny farts as propellant.  Also, who the hell maps the switch from rifle to 203 on the left arrow key.  THE LEFT ARROW KEY!!  For console players that's like mapping it to a second controller.  Had to map the secondary button slot to v cause I was afraid it would mess something up if I changed the primary button.  And they mapped the selector to the middle mouse button and melee to x rather than, you know, the other way around.  I also hate that pushing left ctrl while crouching gets you to stand up instead of going prone which you accomplish by HOLDING DOWN left ctrl.  And you pickup guns by HOLDING DOWN 'f', instead of making f context sensitive.  And a Ranger can carry up to 20 grenades, yet a special forces operator can only carry 3.  Mind you, there was no ballistics for them so where they landed was a random guess, making them useless even without factoring the length of time it takes to throw one and it's fuse length (both unnecessarily long).  The game had absoloutley no ballistics, point at a Target 1000 meters away with a .50 cal and they die without needing to adjust for distance, even when your elevation is below them, only need to account for bullet travel time which seemed arbitrary to me.  Even with no ballistics, you would think the first shot would go on target, even when firing on full auto.  Nope.  The helicopter segment had a few interesting parts, mostly the TADS system and the Hunter Killer Mode, while the ATV section was a joke.  It felt like I was riding a hovercraft over a beach instead of a four-wheeler over rough terrain.  Also, the other gimmick they had was sliding to cover which I did not use at all, since it would require holding down Shift+W+Left Ctrl.  I have a feeling someone spent 30 seconds figuring out where to map the buttons to and then left.  At least they had the option to have sights on a toggle or switch, and leaning is mapped to 'q' and 'e' so they didn't mess that up.  Anyways, in SP there were only 2 memorable points, the ending of the first Ranger mission (of which there are only two), and at the ending of the game.  Overall, a very poor SP experience that did not make me want to purchase it.  Sorry if I ranted for a bit, but I was looking forward to this game.  Feel free to delete this part if you guys think it doesn't belong here or to move it somewhere else.  --[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 20:06, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
+== Page Split ==
+Having played quite a bit of both campaign and multiplayer, I'm going to suggest we make two seperate articles for this game, as it it pretty much two different games bundled onto one disc. There are so many differences, including the weapons, correctness of the weapons, reloads, attachments, and overall realism that they really need to be split up. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
+: Current stance is just OK. Having SP and MP category in each weap seems liek good solution :) And two pages would be pretty messy.
+== MoH uses China Airsoft Aimpoint ==
+Anyone notice - while the original Swedish Aimpoint only has a red dot in various brightness settings on a Red dot, the one used in Medal of Honor are clearly a China Clone with Red and Green Dot.
+: Well, still better than Black Ops with its Romanian AK´s in hands of both Vietcong and Russian army or FAMAS from 2001 in Vietnam.
+::They model the guns pretty much off of just airsoft guns. They buy the expensive ones in which I still don't understand why they don't just buy real ones,Alot of times the airsoft guns are the same price as the real ons.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
+== SAW ==
+Is that a magazine well beneath the ammo belt on the SAW in those pics? Wouldn't that make it an M249 rather than a Mark 46? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 03:24, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
+== M60E3 or M60E4? ==
+Hello, everyone!
+Just curiosity: why is it a M60E3, not an E4?
+Thanks!
+==Some corrections==
+I've noticed the page has a few guns misidentified, some possibily due to anonymous users making all-wise changes. The SIG P226 used by Rabbit is the newer model P226R, you can see the rail under the frame. The MK 46 is an M249 like it's identified in SP, the magazine well under the belt feed is the indicator, as the MK 46 isn't fed by box magazines. The M60E3 appears to be an M60E4, the barrel is rather short, and it has the rail and removeable foregrip, so I believe it's the M60E4/Mk. 43 Mod 1. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]
+:And some dumbass comments here and there. -[[User:The_Winchester|Winchester]]
+The Glock is a 17, not a 19. The picture needs to be changed but I don't know how.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:25, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
+::It is a Glock 19, as the magazine capacity is only 15 rounds, which is the standard (flush) magazine capacity for a Glock 19. Additionally, Glock 19s are commonly carried by AFO personnel.  They quite often receive non-standard weaponry (such as the HK-416 and others such weapons) because it is more important that what they have work under the most extreme conditions and due to their elite status, they are given more leeway in their loadouts.  Look closly next time you see some SOF personnel in the media or whereever you might catch a glimpse (espiecially SFOD-D) and you will see they are packing more unique equipment then your normal soldier or Marine, including Glocks.[[User:SAWGunner89|SAWGunner89]] 23:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
+:: YOu are correct.  I just examined the screen shots in the article and that is a Glock 17, however, the mag capacity is still that of a Glock 19.  Wierd that they would go through the trouble of doing a decent model of the firearm and then screw up on the mag capacity, but I guess it is just bad research.  I added a small section stating a boiled down version of what I stated here in the article so that it may be noted.[[User:SAWGunner89|SAWGunner89]] 23:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
+How is it not a Glock 22 then? I've seen them with tan frames...
+== Mk.18 variant ==
+The Mk.18 variant in the game is actually a Mod.1.  You can tell by the free-floating rails and the forward, folding BUIS.  This is indicative of the Mod.1 variant, as it does not have the front sight mounted on the gas block.[[User:SAWGunner89|SAWGunner89]] 23:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
+I'm not so sure; the RIS looks like the normal KAC RIS used on the Mod.0, and aftermarket gasblocks with integrated folding iron sights aren't exactly rare.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 17:46, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
+Nope, it has a KAC RIS, making it a Mod ''0''. The FSB is just replaced by a low-profile gas block which can be seen in-game by dropping the weapon and taking a close look at it. The BUIS is mounted on the RIS. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:03, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
+: More specifically, it looks like the gas block is one of [http://noveskerifleworks.com/cgi-bin/imcart/display.cgi?item_id=sb105c&cat=155&page=1&search=&since=&status= these], or something similar.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 15:25, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
+An interesting little tidbit I've noticed regarding Rabbit's Mark 18 and M4. When viewed in his hands during use, both have the same gas block and rail-mounted front BUIS. When dropped and looked at on the ground, the Mark 18 retains these modifications. But when you drop the M4, the gas block and BUIS are replaced with a standard FSB. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:13, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
+== Got a copy of this on the cheap, and noticing silliness... ==
+For a start, the PKM has a dust cover that moves but has nothing underneath it; no ejection port, just the side of the gun. But more obviously, if you've got this, play the mission with the AC130 Reaper 31 in it and watch Reaper carefully after it completes it's run. The AC-130 model is clearly only a few hundred yards from the player and about the size of a car. Yay, air support from toy planes! [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 15:04, 9 March 2011 (MSK)
+== Multiplayer guns ==
+What guns in this game are multiplayer only? I know the P90 is one, but are there any others? - [[User:1morey]] May 2, 2011 8:46 PM (EST)
+M16A4, F2000/GL1, RPK, TOZ-194, M21, NDM-86, M24, SV-98, AT4, RPG-7, GP-25, MP-443, C4, and IED are MP only. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:19, 8 May 2011 (CDT)
+Actually, the RPG-7 is in the singleplayer (It is the very first level that was daylight, the one where you used that scope thing to target the tanks and vehicles.), the GP-25 I swore I saw on an AK on one occasion, and C4 I think is used in the campaign. - [[User:1morey]] May 8, 2011 6:23 PM
+:No, the GP-25 is MP only. Believe me, I play SP religiously. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 23:32, 26 June 2011 (CDT)
+== The SAW is not a Mark 46! ==
+Look beneath the ammo belt, you can clearly see a magazine well for inserting M16 magazines. The Mark 46 does ''not'' have this magazine well! This is an M249E3 paratrooper model with a fixed buttstock. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:00, 13 June 2011 (CDT)
+:So it is, nice catch :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:35, 13 June 2011 (CDT)
+::An ''old'' catch, too. It had been changed from Mark 46 to M249 a while back, but I checked the page for something that day and noticed it had been reverted back to Mark 46. My guess is that somebody changed it going by the short barrel, rail system (which is of the type used on the Mark 46), and fixed buttstock, a combination which understandably makes it look like a Mark 46 to the untrained eye. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 23:30, 26 June 2011 (CDT)
+== Please help with these weapons! ==
+I need help with these guns:
+[[image:MOH2010-unknown1.jpg|500px|thumb|none|Seen in SP mounted on several tanks.]]
+[[image:MOH2010-unknown2.jpg|500px|thumb|none|Multiplayer reward for killing with pistols.]]
+Whoever you are, thank you in advance! - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 16:15, 15 June 2011 (CDT)
+The top one is a DShK in an anti-aircraft mount:
+[[Image:DShKM-vehicle-mount.jpg|thumb|none|400px|DShKM heavy machine gun in standard vehicle mounting on a Romanian TR-85 main battle tank - 12.7x108mm]]
+I don't know about the second, but this page also needs to have the M230 chain guns on the Apaches added. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 23:32, 1 October 2011 (CDT)
+== Sequel on the way ==
+:So a sequel is coming out for Medal of Honor what guns do you guy think will be in it? --[[User:GVK2009|GVK2009]] 22:19, 16 June 2011 (CDT)GVK2009
+::Probably the same more or less with a few additions. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:23, 17 June 2011 (CDT)
+== ??? ==
+[[image:MOH2010-Mortar-1.jpg|600px|thumb|none|?]]
+It's missing a baseplate. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 14:03, 7 November 2011 (CST)
+[[image:MOH2010-BTR.jpg|600px|thumb|none|80 or 90 ?]]
+Help would be appreciated. - bozito
+:Some sort of BTR. But it appears that BTR-60s, 70's and 80's all carried KPVT 14.5mm machine guns main gun and a PKT secondary gun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 14:03, 7 November 2011 (CST)
+[[image:MOH2010-GAU.jpg|600px|thumb|none|]]
+Plus, I am not sure about the GAU-8. The player can "use" it, but it is never seen on-screen.
+:You see the A-10s fly over before you enter the building you attack the control tower from. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:39, 8 November 2011 (CST)
+[[image:MOH2010-AA.jpg|600px|thumb|none|?]]
+:[[ZU-23-2]]. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:39, 8 November 2011 (CST)
+----
+Here is a better pic of that unknown BTR.
+[[image:MOH2010-BTR-2.jpg|600px|thumb|none|]]
+:Based on the location of the doors, I'll say BTR-60. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 15:01, 9 November 2011 (CST)
++ can anyone tell me what the hell is mounted on the top of the Bradley?
+:25mm M242 Bushmaster chain gun, M240C coax, TOW missiles --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 15:01, 9 November 2011 (CST)
+--[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 05:22, 9 November 2011 (CST)
+ANother mortar from the MP
+[[image:MOH2010-Mortar2.jpg|600px|thumb|none|?]]
+bozito
+:Looks like a 60mm to me. That'd make it an M224. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:46, 9 November 2011 (CST)
+::It looks a bit big for 60mm. Plus, the M224 has that "grip" near the base. M29 81mm mortar? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 15:09, 9 November 2011 (CST)
+:::The grip is IIRC the firing handle and incorporates the trigger. This looks more like an M29 or even an M2. Could you get an image of the baseplate so we can see the shape? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:56, 3 December 2011 (CST)
+[[image:MOH2010-baseplate.jpg|600px|thumb|none|]]
+== That weird SAW again ==
+[[Image:LOLWUTOMG.JPG|thumb|none|600px|]]
+This is the same Mk 46 Mod 0 / SAW hybrid that's in BF3 and MW3. I'm starting to wonder if it isn't actually a real thing. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:46, 21 November 2011 (CST)
+:I think none of them are hybrids. They are let's say 90% SAWs and 10% Mk46s. If I am correct, the Mk46's handguard can be installed on an M249, but adding a STANAG well on an Mk46 would be much harder.
+:Take a look at the SCAR-L in [[Alpha Protocol]]; it has ejection port cover and HK-style selector pictographs, but is not a SCAR/AR-15/HK416 hybrid. Or we could say that almost every gun in [[Soldier of Fortune: Payback]] is a hybrid of two or even more guns mixed together. Video games like to "combine" two or more guns to get more cooler designs. Rarely even movies do. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 02:38, 21 November 2011 (CST)
+::Yeah, I wouldn't find it odd if ''only'' MW3 had done it, but BF3 and MoH are rather less about the cool fantasy guns and more about things that actually exist somewhere. And for this same odd variant to turn up in three different games leaves me wondering if there aren't actual SAWs with Mk46 handguards out there, and if so, if this version has a name / designation of its own. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:44, 21 November 2011 (CST)
+:::The results for Googling up "M249 SAW with Mk46 handguard" are airsoft guns. It is possible that the devs used airsoft guns to model their weapons. On the other hand, I think the MoH team was working with the most reliable military advisors and war veterans, and if they were cool with this SAW, so should we. Some games show the M4 with non-stepped a barrel (Hitman, Kane & Lynch, even MoH). A SAW with an Mk46/48 handguard is the same. (And the SAW in MoH even has a carry handle. Who the hell would install a carry handle onto his Mk46?) - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 03:02, 21 November 2011 (CST)
+:::::The Mod 1 variants of both the Mark 46 and Mark 48 actually ''do'' have carry handles. [http://www.fnhusa.com/le/products/firearms/family.asp?fid=FNF055&gid=FNG008] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 18:54, 21 November 2011 (CST)
+::::I know, I could accept if it wasn't real (and that the BF3 team might have got the idea from the MoH dev team, so it's not that odd in those two). It's just particularly odd for two rival franchises to invent the same hybrid gun, like if I saw the same seemingly made-up animal in two completely seperate games I'd wonder if it wasn't just something real I wasn't familiar with. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:11, 21 November 2011 (CST)
+:::::As an airsofter, as far as I know any airsoft gun listed as a Mk 46 is actually the MOH/BF3 M249, as they have carry handles and mag wells. Putting a Mk 46 rail system on an M249E2 isn't any different than putting a KAC rail system on an M4A1, that's just seen as normal. Rail systems are rail systems, it's just an aftermarket part, not a hybrid. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:59, 21 November 2011 (CST)
+::::::Yeah, I'm with Alex here. There isn't anything weird or "hybrid" about this SAW, it's just an M249 para model with a Mark 46 rail system. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 09:00, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+:::::::That is something weird about it. What I'm asking is if it's a real variant of some kind with an actual name or just an "X with a Y" frankengun. Both the others are actual hybrids with multiple features from both weapons; eg the one in BF3 also has a short barrel (which would make it a para version) and a full stock (which would make it a Mk 46 with the short barrel) but a STANAG magwell (which makes it, um, nothing). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:10, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+::::::::The Mark 46 has a short barrel as standard and an M249 Para with a fixed stock is just an M249 Para with a fixed stock. The mixing and matching of some components doesn't change anything. The only way it could be a true hybrid is if the receiver lacked a magazine well and had a vehicle mounting lug (though in that case one could argue it's just a mis-calibered Mark 48) or vice versa, since both the mag well and lug are removed from the receiver of a Mark 46 to reduce weight. This is effectively just an M249 Para standing in for a Mark 46. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 09:39, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+:::::::::You misread: with a stock ''and'' a short barrel it would make it a Mk 46 in terms of real-life configurations, since the Para SAW doesn't have a fixed stock (that's part of what makes it a Para SAW; you might as well say it's an M249-E2 with a short barrel even though one of the distinctive features of the M249-E2 is that it ''doesn't'' have a short barrel). What makes it a hybrid is that it has a series of features which are distinctive of multiple ''different'' versions of the weapon.
+::::::::::No, I read it right, you just aren't getting what I'm saying. ''Lacking a magazine well and vehicle mounting lug'' makes it a Mark 46 in terms of real life configuration, since stocks and barrels can be swapped out between different Minimi/M249 variants. The Minimi isn't like the AR-15 platform where doing something as simple as changing out a barrel with one that's longer or shorter makes it analogous to one of a different model. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:34, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+:::::::::::I'm not buying that. You can't say "this is a Mk 46 Mod 0 / Para SAW with some other bits and pieces from other variants thrown on" and then argue this does ''not'' make the configuration a hybrid in the truest sense of the term. Anyway, this isn't particularly relevant. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:01, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+:::::::::This has got ridiculously sidetracked. What I want to know is if this setup (Mk46 rails, full stock, STANAG magwell) is a '''real configuration of the weapon''' with an actual name (like, say, "Para" being the name for a short-barrel version with a collapsable stock) or just a made-up one. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:48, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+::::::::::In a broad sense, yeah, just made up. An M249 Para with a fixed stock and rail system to make it look like a Mark 46. Same principle as dressing up an FN MAG to look like an M240 or a Daewoo K3 to look like an M249. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:34, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+:::::::::::So, just an odd coincidence / devs copying each other? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:01, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+::::::::::::Most likely they all wanted the most recent version of the M249, which is the Mk 46, but made the mistake of modeling them after airsoft "Mk 46"s, which are, just like these, still M249s. That's my guess. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:07, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+Look what I found.
+[[Image:Airsoft CA MK46SPW Cc.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]
+I guess that settles it, the M249 Para with Mk 46 bits is called an ''airsoft gun''. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:12, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+:Ta Daaaa! [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:30, 22 November 2011 (CST)
+::Yeah, save for the Crane stock, that's exactly what we have here. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:31, 30 November 2011 (CST)
+== G3A3 ==
+The receiver of the G3A3 says: "Kal. .308". Is that correct? I mean, I thought HK uses the "7.62x51mm" marking on their guns. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 13:28, 30 November 2011 (CST)
+:Civilian G3 variant maybe? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 13:57, 30 November 2011 (CST)
+:Where on the reciver did it state the caliber? I'm asking because G3 rifles do not have caliber markings on the side of the weapon. I'm currently looking at both German and Greek manufactured models. Most European firearms would be marked 7.62(at minimum) someplace not the american .308 markings.[[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 14:47, 30 November 2011 (CST)
+::[[image:MOH2010-G3Rec.jpg|600px|thumb|none|Here]]
+::--[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 14:54, 30 November 2011 (CST)
+:::Quickly checking HKpro indicates that the reciver should be marked "Cal 7.62X51" on a properly marked G3A3. This seems to confirm that they used a civilian copy as the model. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 14:59, 30 November 2011 (CST)
+::::So maybe they used an American civilian variant (maybe got it from a film armorer) to model it? At least they knew that it should have a mag release paddle. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 15:31, 30 November 2011 (CST)
+:::::Well it says SACO too, and a quick seach shows that SACO is an American importer of HK41s. So it's a proper G3A3, but with HK41 trademarks. Props to DICE for adding the mag release :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:41, 30 November 2011 (CST)
+::::::Not DICE, Danger Close. Dice did the multiplayer only.-protoAuthor 23:03, 30 November 2011 (CST)
+:::::::Oops, right, forgot :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:43, 1 December 2011 (CST)
+::::::::You forgot that SP and MP had different engines? :P --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:15, 2 December 2011 (CST)
+:::::::::In the moment of writing that, I guess I did. I think I played something like two hours of MP though, it's really just a singleplayer game to me :P [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:36, 2 December 2011 (CST)
+Okay, so I managed to unlock the G3 in the MP finally. (Damn, I hate sniping!) You can see on the page that it lacks the mag-release paddle, but has a SEF trigger group. I'm not really sure how to call it, as the world-model and class icons have the paddle correctly, but the receiver markings say "HK 91". I could be wrong, but I think the trigger groups are interchangeable, so it could be a HK91A2 with SEF trigger group. The world-model and class icons are G3s, so it could look weird that the 1stPer and 3rdPer models are listed separately. Help would be appreciated. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:48, 5 December 2011 (CST)
+== AK47 ==
+Sorry, but how is the AK in the game an AKM? It has the stock and barrel of an AK47. so how is it an AKM? --Gunner5
+:I presume it's labeled going by the receiver, but someone more familiar with the AK will have to confirm. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:08, 30 November 2011 (CST)
+::Yes, check the receiver. AK-47 should have milled one and AKM should have stamped one[http://www.ultimak.com/AKReceiverID.htm] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:22, 2 December 2011 (CST)
+== Small fixes ==
+Just went over the page and made some spelling and other fixes. The EOTech in the game was identified as a 556, but this is wrong. The model used is a 552. Also fixed some incorrect capitalization (every instance of the word "holographic" was capitalized when it shouldn't be) and removed the incorrect notation about the MP7A1 in the SP campaign being full-auto only (it most definitely isn't). [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:45, 1 December 2011 (CST)
+:With the MP7 I meant that the selector stays on auto all the time. Looks like I had some problems expressing myself. :) --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 00:22, 2 December 2011 (CST)
+== Bradley ?! ==
+[[Image:MOH2010-M240C-1.jpg|thumb|none|450px|]]
+What the hell is the gun on the top? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:46, 3 December 2011 (CST)
+:I believe it's supposed to be an M2 Browning. All the armour in Bad Company used a similar weird little RWS, even Russian and MEC vehicles.
+:[[Image:BFBC1-Shipunov-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px]] [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:52, 3 December 2011 (CST)
+::Yeah, the Browning was on my mind too. I will get some other, detailed caps and upload them. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 09:46, 3 December 2011 (CST)
+== Hybrid AK ==
+Should we classify the AK's as hybrid AK's? the reason is because they are all combos of different AK's.--gunner5
+== M16A4 or M16A3 or R0901 ==
+According to Colt, the full-auto M16A4 is the R0901 or Model 901 or M901 or M16A3. The A4 should be changed to one of these, because according to the rules. we should name weapons based on how they look or behave, not how the creators call them. What do you think? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 13:16, 7 January 2012 (CST)
+:I believe the policy is never to identiy guns as M16A3s, as they are pretty much allways intended to be M16A2s or A4s (there are two different guns both designated the A3, one with A2 sights and the other with a flattop) and are just depicted with the wrong firing mode. Also the US army M16A4 is designated the Model 945, 901 is the export model (don't think there are any differeances, is just a different designation).  --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:41, 7 January 2012 (CST)
+::Yeah, the policy says that about the M16A3, but that is because in movies they all go "rock-n-roll". It think this rule is kinda "stupid". For example in films like [[Far Cry (2009)]] the mercs are using full-auto M16s with flat-tops. IMFDb calls them A4s but how do we know that those are A4s. I mean, is that impossible that mercenaries would use the full-auto M16A3s? (I never understood why would anyone want a gun with a 0-1-3 selector but that is an other question.) Or S.H.I.E.L.D. guards in [[Thor]]. They could also M16A3s. (Of course it is hard to tell if they are not firing them. Obviously in films with US Army those are standing in for the A4s.) Some organizations must use the A3s otherwise Colt would not offer them, right?  - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 18:21, 7 January 2012 (CST)
+:::I always though (and someone who knows more about this feel free to correct me) that the majority of movie M16A4s were likely to be a civilian semi automatic rifle with the lower receiver either modified to full automatic or the entire lower swapped for a full auto one. Bear in mind, the M16A3 is only used by the US Navy, and limited use at that, so it is pretty unlikely that one is ever used in a film. Sure, in the Marvel universe SHIELD might issue their guards with the M16A3, but it is very unlikely that the actual rifles used were genuine M16A3s. In my opinion it is just easier to call the rifles A2 or A4 rather than guessing as to whether they are an A3.  --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:47, 7 January 2012 (CST)
+::::I think the point that myself and others have been trying to make on this site is, while A3s in real life (movies & TV) are never A3s becuase there are only a few and only SEALs have them (they're other things converted), in games (or anime, etc) they are whatever they're intended to be. In a movie about the Army or Marines we would say "M16A4s converted to full auto, which is inaccurate for real life, as A4s are burst", but in a game, like this, COD4 singleplayer, or BF3, they are actually M16A3s, and we should say "M16A3s, which are inaccurate for real life, as they should be using A4s, which are the same, but are burst". [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:16, 7 January 2012 (CST)
+SEALs aren't the only ones that use A3s... The CB Reserve unit a buddy of mine is in are issued A3s. I'd say that the A3 is just Navy specific.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 20:51, 7 January 2012 (CST)
+:Oh, okay, didn't know that :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:07, 7 January 2012 (CST)
+::What I wanted to say is that the M16 page should have an M16A3 section, at least for the video games that feature them. Quickly checked the M16 page there is at least 4 games with M16A3 rifles (two with A2 sights ID as an "M16A2 with incorrect full-auto fire mode", two with flat-top. There could be even more.) - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 03:37, 8 January 2012 (CST)
+:::And the "A4s with incorrect full auto mode" [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:05, 8 January 2012 (CST)
+This "''we should say "M16A3s, which are inaccurate for real life, as they should be using A4s, which are the same, but are burst''"" reminds me of how popular it is to depict regular US Army and USMC servicemen using M4A1 (full auto) Carbine...
+Having section for M16A3 would be nice. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:42, 9 January 2012 (CST)
+== Medal of Honor: Warfighter ==
+Yeah!!! [http://www.medalofhonor.com/blog/2012/02/warfighter-coming Medal of Honor: Warfighter] is the confirmed name of the sequel, powered by the Frostbite 2 engine. Now here's a task for you folks: give a detailed analysis of the weapon on the art :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:53, 25 February 2012 (CST)
+:An M4 variant (can't tell which one) with a Magpul CTR stock with some kind of cheek rest I've never seen, Magpul PMag, Troy BUIS, and a Trijicon TA01DOC ACOG, and a rail system I can't identify because of so little that's seen. Edit: It also seems to have a LaRue Tactical lower receiver. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:09, 25 February 2012 (CST)
+:It's also got clip-type rail covers. I'll put in the proper name when I find it.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 15:54, 25 February 2012 (CST)
+::EDIT: [http://www.laruetactical.com/larue-camo-index-clip-set-72-pcs LaRue Index Clips.] I think.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 16:02, 25 February 2012 (CST)
+Actually, could be base gun be an [http://www.laruetactical.com/larue-tactical-obr-556-12%E2%80%9D-sbr OBR 5.56?] [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 16:04, 25 February 2012 (CST)
+The rifle is a LaRue Tactical OBR 5.56 fitted with a CTR stock with [http://www.laruetactical.com/larue-tactical-risr-reciprocating-inline-stock-riser RISR] (Reciprocating Inline Stock Riser) and [http://www.laruetactical.com/larue-tactical-pod-prone-optimization-device POD] (Prone Optimization Device). You can see more of the handguard in the [http://cdn.medalofhonor.com/sites/default/files/background_warfighter_front.jpg larger image] and it is fitted with [http://www.laruetactical.com/larue-grip-adapter-panels LaRue Grip Adapter Panels].  --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:40, 25 February 2012 (CST)
+Interesting... So should this weapon appear in actual game with the highly-visible LARUE Logo on lower receiver, it can be confirmed to be product placement of LaRue Tactical. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:07, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+:Is that a dig at something? You can have product placement without oversized logos, you know. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 08:44, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+::I believe it's Masterius being his usual passive-aggressive self. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:47, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+::: Oh. I thought it was a dig at [[Modern Warfare 3]]'s massive Remington logos. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 08:54, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+::::I believe it's more a dig at an argument I had yesterday, specifically my pointing out that HK wasn't a major sponsor of MW3 because their logo only appears on one weapon (the suppressed version of the MW3 USP) and it's hidden except when reloading (meaning it probably isn't supposed to be there either). The big logos on the weapons from Remington, the Leupold trades on scopes and the EOTech logos indicate that Activision made deals to advertise those companies. With HK, they probably had to pay ''them'' money just to include them, and certainly didn't have any deal to prominently feature their logo. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:59, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+:::::That's paranoia.
+:::::Anyway, yes, there are different ways of product placement: some are more obvious, some are less. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:36, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+::::::No, it's having the remotest ability to recognise a pattern given you do this all the time (I've noticed these snide little digs ever since you lost that argument about SVUs) and think I'm too stupid to notice. And there's a difference between a work simply ''containing'' a product and having a deal with the manufacturer to advertise that product and feature their logo prominently. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:53, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+:::::::You just ''love'' to remind you have the admin powers, don't you? This kind of argument leads nowhere.
+:::::::There is a difference between a product and its associated names which I've written at the bottom of this particular discussion. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:24, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+:Modern warfare 3 added in massive Remington logos where they shouldn't be though making it obvious product placement. If the LaRue Tactical OBR was in the game with the big logo on the magazine well, that would just be correct modelling as that is how it is in real life.  --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:22, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+::Could be. But the manufacturing company might sue the publisher for unauthorised use of their name, which is why they tend to be replaced (on weapon) and omitted (from weapon's name). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:36, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+:::I realise that, was just pointing out that the fact that they added in logos where they shouldn't be in MW3 just made it blatantly obvious it was going on, rather than retaining correct logos. I wouldn't care if this gun turned up in game with the big LaRue Tactical markings on the lower receiver as these are correct, but the Remington markings in MW3 annoyed me. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:45, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+::::Yes, the MW3 case is just egregious. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:06, 26 February 2012 (CST)
+== The white smoke grenade used in ''Breaking Bagram'' ==
+The M18 only comes in red, green, yellow, and violet. White smoke would makes it an [[AN/M8 HC smoke grenade|AN/M8 or M83]]. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 17:53, 15 September 2012 (EDT)

Talk:Medal of Honor (2010): Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 15:33, 25 November 2022

Remington M24 a fake

Missing weapons: Heavy Weapons In Singleplayer and Explosives Multiplayer

Glock 19, tan Frame?

Missing weapons

Any screenshots of "new sidearms"

New Sidearms confirmed!

Possible 1911

Knife?

beta release date?

weapon balance

First Part

Green Beret on cover

Guns revealed in multi-player demo at E3

List

Spliting into sections

LMG Special Weapons

Best of 3 shooters?

Animations

Full Auto M16A4

Hi-Def MP videos

360 Beta?

Clip/Magazine

"The Catalyst" Linkin Park song trailer

Unimpressed....

Dragunov

Ugh...

CONFIRMED new Weapons?

Games in Steven Speilberg category?

Graphical Engine for the game

SR25/M110?

Getting screenshots

SR25?

Switching modes of fire

M203, AK, and Dragunov

Page Split

MoH uses China Airsoft Aimpoint

SAW

M60E3 or M60E4?

Some corrections

Mk.18 variant

Got a copy of this on the cheap, and noticing silliness...

Multiplayer guns

The SAW is not a Mark 46!

Please help with these weapons!

Sequel on the way

???

That weird SAW again

G3A3

AK47

Small fixes

Bradley ?!

Hybrid AK

M16A4 or M16A3 or R0901

Medal of Honor: Warfighter

The white smoke grenade used in Breaking Bagram

Navigation menu

Search