View Single Post
  #34  
Old 07-22-2011, 10:43 PM
Mazryonh Mazryonh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 290
Default

If I may, one way to solve a potential category problem between Machine Pistols that could qualify as Compact Submachine Guns (and therefore inclusion into the "Submachine Gun" category) is to post a quick rule that could clarify this problem. The classic MAC-10 and Skorpion, for instance, have been called both a submachine gun and a machine pistol at different times. A solution to this fuzzy area would be to posit that a true submachine gun has both a buttstock and a dedicated space to put your offhand out of the box--without both these features, the MAC-10, the MP5K, the TEC-9, etc. are machine pistols.

Of course, if you decided to buy an elongated upper receiver that includes a vertical foregrip mounting point for your MAC-10, then you could call it a full-fledged submachine gun. I'm driven to wonder if the finished product could compete with its more modern cousin the HK UMP45.

(Does anyone else feel that this discussion about categories in general be split into a new thread?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Tim View Post
You wouldn't think to look for rules in Category:Assault Rifle before adding an M16 to a page, now would you?
No, but I did happen to read the definition of Assault Rifles and Battle Rifles on wikipedia before versions of those defining features were posted on this wiki. In any case, when someone drafts up a comprehensive "how to edit or create new pages" guide on this site, there should definitely be a reference to how "when you look to add a firearm to the various categories, please consult the defining features of that category before adding it."

Quote:
Originally Posted by MT2008 View Post
But anyway, separating PDWs (which represent a comparatively minor trend in firearm history) from SMGs would be almost as ridiculous as insisting that we come up with three new categories for revolvers. If you wish to argue for that, too, then be my guest.
No, I don't believe that revolvers should be split into old forms and new forms (though I think there could be a supercategory for "Black Powder Firearms" that could be useful for someone who quickly wanted to find firearms that were made and used before the smokeless powder revolution). However, revolvers have not changed their role since they were introduced, that being very short-range defense, and in a pinch, offense at that range. Submachine guns have changed from being very mobile support weapons for slower-firing battle rifles in WWII, to being relegated to police or special forces work in modern times due to the rise of body armour and assault rifles amongst modern militaries. The PDW in this sense is supposed to update the submachine concept by virtue of its new rounds, and would fulfill that CQB role now more effectively against targets wearing body armour proof against pistol rounds.

I don't see what you meant when you said that I "bought into the hype." I would think that purely on the basis of their shorter cases and lighter bullets, PDW rounds give less muzzle flash/blast and less recoil than most 5.56mm carbines would. Isn't that simply a function of the physics behind the firearms in question? I didn't say anything like "second-line personnel in First-World armies should ditch their 5.56mm ultracompact carbines for FN P90s" or the like. The costs for PDW guns and ammunition could easily come down if more competition was introduced as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MT2008 View Post
Um, making incorrect edits is hardly grounds for banning by itself.
I was under the impression that we might introduce "privilege levels" for users on the wiki. For example, the forum currently distinguishes between "Senior," "Junior," and other levels of members right now, but doesn't award differing levels of posting privileges. A site like GameFAQs does, however--users gain "Karma" points by posting or contributing within the rules, and gain a bigger post limit the more karma points they accrue. A similar system governing the number of edits or picture contributions could help to cut the unwanted "noise" by unscrupulous users, such as limiting the amount of edits to pages they can make, followed by (temporary) revocation of such privileges if they prove undeserving.

In any case, I'd like a verdict soon on this. I'm glad we've had a civil discussion about this so far, but I'd like to know if we're going to live and let live for this category, or euthanize it.
Reply With Quote