Holy hell, that was a lot of weapons to analyze.
![cod modern warfare 3 vs battlefield 3 cod modern warfare 3 vs battlefield 3](https://www.cheatcc.com/imagesfeatures/battlefield3vsmodernwarfare3_0.jpg)
Pros: High stopping power, probably decent range Range not specified (damn it!), but probably at least ~800 m.*Phew* Try saying all that in one breath. It's certainly close, but these factors give Battlefield 3 a significant advantage in mid range.įor long range, we're going to analyze the M4A1, ACR, M14 EBR, PKP Pecheneg, MK46, AK-47, SCAR-L, L86 LSW, RSASS, FAD, M60E4, and Dragunov vs. What makes the difference is the significantly superior stopping power brought in by their SMGs and the across-the-board reliability of their shotguns, which I think will enable them to hit harder as the fight moves closer-in. Yeah, 600 rds/min loses out when compared to 800 rds/min but I wouldn't really wanna stick my head up regardless of the fire rate zipping past my position. Here I'm going to give the edge to Team Battlefield because when it comes to automatic weapons, fast is (more or less) fast. Their shotguns are also generally much more reliable, with simple box or tubular magazines and either semi-automatic or pump-action fire modes that don't make things unnecessarily complicated (looking at you, Striker and Model 1887). 45 ACP and the 5.45x29mm (which is a rifle cartridge) will really lay down the hurt on the CoD team, and with a slower rate of fire they will have a much more manageable and practical fire rate (at the cost of having a harder time keeping their foes suppressed). The AA-12 is admittedly the superior automatic shotgun when compared with the USAS-12, thanks to its significantly longer effective range, but I don't see that individual weapon as being very significant in such a large firefight.īattlefield 3, alternately, is bringing in the UMP 45 and the AKS-74U, with the mindset of stopping power over fire rate.
![cod modern warfare 3 vs battlefield 3 cod modern warfare 3 vs battlefield 3](https://www.gamalive.com/images/une/83-battlefield-3-call-duty-modern-warfare-match-10112011091301.jpg)
Their Striker is gonna be a nightmare to reload and the Model 1887's awkward lever-action won't do it any favors in a modern firefight. Shotgun-wise, it's not looking good for team CoD. They lack stopping power with the dinky 9mm, but nonetheless there will be much less of a logistical strain and they will be able to suppress the Battlefield 3 soldiers a lot easier as a result. I like MW3's submachine gun loadout because they're bringing two simple weapons to the table-the MP5 and the PP90M1, which bring a good balance of high fire rate and large magazine sizes. Pros: High stopping power, semi automatic, decent magazine size the M9, the MP-443 Grach, and the Glock 17C. 45, the FN Five-Seven, the MP412, and the Desert Eagle vs. Both teams have combat knives and both teams have machetes, but because Modern Warfare 3 can shake things up with a shield, they get the edge.įor short range, we're going to analyze the USP. Up-close it's definitely a mean piece of work to contend with and one thing it will protect against for sure is another melee weapon. The Riot Shield can offer makeshift cover in case some of their troops get pinned down, or a Riot Shield-wielding soldier can expose himself to draw fire in case some other assets are being targeted and they need to divert some of that enemy fire elsewhere. What tips the comparison in favor of Call of Duty for me is the Riot Shield-sure it might not protect against concentrated, raw firepower but it offers a level of tactical variation that Battlefield's teams simply don't have. The machetes are going to be scary but probably not as combat practical in such a large-scale situation.
![cod modern warfare 3 vs battlefield 3 cod modern warfare 3 vs battlefield 3](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/kvHivD6FYW4/maxresdefault.jpg)
Battlefield 3's team has a bit of a weakness in that the faction with the bayonet is not equipped with a compatible rifle, meaning they're carrying glorified combat knives that won't be as effective when they're not jutting out of the business end of a big bad gun. The combat knives obviously bring reliable lethality in the event of a close-quarters encounter. Pros: Large and intimidating, offers longer reach, can inflict serious wounds with easeĬons: Makeshift weapon, difficult to use in extremely close quartersīoth arsenals here have their strengths and weaknesses.