**OFFICIAL** AT Battlefield 3 FAQ and News Thread

[GullyFoyle]

Gamespy - BF3: Post-Launch Developer Q&A

By Bennett Ring | Nov 16, 2011
Dice answers concerns about the post-launch support for the PC.

It's been three long weeks since Battlefield 3 lined us up in front of a tank cannon loaded with awesome, before blowing us away with its technological prowess and deep core gameplay. In that time we're yet to see a PC patch, and day by day the forums are becoming a noisier home of frustration. We managed to track down the most impressively tri-named Karl Magnus Troedsson, CEO of Dice and the man responsible for that statement about the consoles switching to lead platform, to find out what's the deal – where's the patch? When will the IRNV cheat be toned back? And didn't he realize that statement would stir up a whole bunch of PC nerd-rage?

GameSpy: There's been a bit of a shit-storm on the forums about an interview where you said Dice went back to the consoles as lead platform half way through development. Some PC gamers are saying this amounts to lying given that the messaging pre-launch was all about PC being lead console – can you explain the division of resources during development to shed light on this statement? Did the PC build still receive significant resources during the last half of the dev period? Why was the messaging changed after launch?

Karl Magnus Troedsson: I'd be happy to explain. In order to assure we could deliver the quality of experience we wanted to deliver on all platforms we needed to spend our team focusing on each platform individually. Starting out our primary focus was on the PC, making sure we had a stable and fun build early on. This was used to set our ambitious visual and gameplay targets, defining how far we aimed to push the envelope. To deliver the game on the consoles we later needed then to spend effort and energy ensuring the game experience would look and play great on these platforms as well. At no point did we cease development on the PC, and the PC version of Battlefield 3 includes significant features that are unique thanks to the power and flexibility of the PC, like 64 players in multiplayer, a seamless web-based Battlelog integration, and a graphical fidelity that scales upwards as you invest in more high end components.


GameSpy: We're three weeks into launch and it looks like most of the post-launch support has gone into the console versions. Is this because the 360 and PS3 have had bigger issues than the PC? When can PC users expect to start seeing patches to resolve some of the major issues, such as frequent crashing and heavy rubber banding/lag on certain maps?

Karl Magnus Troedsson: We have a dedicated support team that closely looks at issues on all platforms. DICE's PC heritage means we are especially aware of the needs of the PC platform and intend to continue to support it for a long time. We have been providing support to Battlelog and our back end servers which directly benefit all players, including those on the PC. We are also working with partners at AMD and Nvidia, both of which have released drivers for PC players which have substantial Battlefield 3 specific improvements. Additional support is in the works, and while we are aware no fix can come fast enough our dedicated team is working around the clock and around the world to make Battlefield 3 the biggest and smoothest launch. As I write this, for example, we are just getting ready to roll out quite a hefty update for PC players, with consoles to follow.


GameSpy: Many are claiming that the much-requested Commo Rose and chat window feel like they were put in at the last minute on the PC, and are both basically unusable. Will Dice be improving these at all, and if so how and when?

Karl Magnus Troedsson: We are listening to the feedback from the community, and we are looking into how we can keep evolving and improving a large number of features in Battlefield 3. The user interface is one of those items.


GameSpy: Have Dice been happy with the reliability of Battlelog – from our perspective it's been relatively stable, but what's it been like on your back end? Any major fires that needed to be stamped out?

Karl Magnus Troedsson: We are very proud of the functionality of Battlelog and the features it offers to players in its release version, as well as the flexibility it allows us as developers to quickly provide updates and directly interact with our players. Stability-wise, it has been nothing short of phenomenal, with practically no down-time at all since the launch of the game. From here, it's basically a question of updating and evolving the service to make it more and more powerful as we go along.


GameSpy: One of the longest threads on the BF3 forums at the moment regards the IRNV scope, which many say is incredibly overpowered. Is this something Dice is aware of, and are looking to change? Why was it altered from the beta version, which wasn't so useful?

Karl Magnus Troedsson: Based on player feedback, we have made some tweaks to the IRNV scope to make it more balanced with the rest of the accessories in the game. The change is planned to go into a future update of Battlefield 3, and we will have more details on this update at a later date. In general, balance issues are always a hot topic for a game that attracts competitive players. We take all balance feedback very seriously, and we strive to make sure that when we make any change it is always an improvement to the overall game. This means being very careful when we make changes so we don't over react. Battlefield 3 is a living game, and we intend to support it with balance and technical updates.


GameSpy: Anything else you'd like to add?

Karl Magnus Troedsson: First, I'd like to say thanks to all of our fans for playing the game and giving us feedback on their experience. It's really for all of you we have created Battlefield 3, and I think we are in a very good place with the game. We have already rolled out a number of client-side updates with new features and fixes, as well as a large number of server patches to fine tune network performance, game stability, and server side configuration options. Battlelog, our social platform for Battlefield 3, is also receiving regular updates where we implement the most wanted features directly from the community. A teething issue has been a few players who do not respect the integrity of the game, who boost their stats in unsportsmanlike manners, or who outright cheat. We are hitting down hard on those players, banning and stats wiping and implementing harder anti-cheat checks, which has been very well received by the community.

All in all, I think what we have done with the servers, the game, and Battlelog since the launch of Battlefield 3 really shows our passion to support the game wholeheartedly. There will be more updates, and then of course there's the Back to Karkand expansion pack in December. Battlefield players are in for a treat, and Battlefield 3 as a whole will just keep getting better as we go along.


Spy Guy says: That's lovely to hear, but the fact remains we haven't seen a single patch beyond the Day 1 patch. Relative to other PC games, that's a rather low level of post-launch support, so here's hoping this promised upcoming patch is a biggie. How do you think Dice has handled the PC support after launch?

 

[M0oG0oGaiPan]

wow I just started using the IRNV last night. That thing is cheap as hell. It's like that glow mod people would use in QWTF so they could see you in the dark.

 

[maevinj]

Yep, but if you don't use a gun with irnv, then you're going to owned.

 

[GullyFoyle]

It's the new Magnum Ammo...

 

[s44]

wow I just started using the IRNV last night. That thing is cheap as hell. It's like that glow mod people would use in QWTF so they could see you in the dark.

Well how do you think US soldiers rack up such lopsided K/D ratios IRL!?

(Yes, yes, balanced != real. Another reason why the contemporary setting is a bit troublesome, I guess.)

 

[96Firebird]

I have yet to use a gun with IRNV, because once I get to 100 kills with any gun I move onto the next... And I do just fine. Yes, it may be cheap, but it doesn't guarantee kills. I am fine with it the way it is, I rarely sit and hide in one spot anyways.

 

[Childs]

Yep, but if you don't use a gun with irnv, then you're going to owned.

I just dont like playing the game in black and white. Also, I used it for a little bit early on the M4 and 870, but it used to cause noticeable lag when zooming in. It might have been related to video capture. So I took it off and never went back to it. You can still do well, just not run the table, cause theres always going to be that guy using something like a M60 with IRNV + grip + extended ammo hiding in a shadow or bush. Last night seemed like half the people were running that kind of setup, with just a variation on the gun. Well, half the people who killed me.

Whats really starting to get annoying is the USAS-12 with frag ammo. I've been devastated with that thing from like 20m away. And because of the suppression effect once the guy starts shooting at you, youre done. Thats going to be the new pos combo...USAS-12 + IRNV + Extended Ammo + Frag Ammo.

 

[Childs]

And for the record, the P90 is garbage. The higher rate of fire does not make up for the reduced stopping power and range of the PDW-R. When I switched to the P90 I could not win a close quarters gun fight. The other guy would always have 10-20% health left when they killed me. And I had this duel on Firestorm with this sniper, from about 50m. I single shotted him at least 15 times, probably more before he went down. So I went back to the PDW-R, and it was like night and day. I could double and triple kill within 10-15m, whereas with the P90 I would have been lucky to get one.

EDIT: wow, I still have the bad taste in my mouth from all the crappy gameplay from last night. No more ranting. :biggrin:

 

[M0oG0oGaiPan]

I was always against it because it felt so wrong but I tried to Jihad jeep last night. LOL I loaded up my jeep with c4 and I was driving straight for this tank. I jumped out and the thing just stopped completely. 0 braking distance. I didn't know what was up. So there was this tank like 8 feet away and this jeep is just sitting there with c4. I have no idea what to do so I panick and throw a grenade at my jeep. I get shot down by an engy and my jeep blows up out of range of the tank that still doesn't know I was there lol. So bad :'(

Edit: The IRNV scopes are amazing for spotting people. Helps your chopper pilots a lot too.

 

[Zargon]

Gamespy - BF3: Post-Launch Developer Q&A


Spy Guy says: That's lovely to hear, but the fact remains we haven't seen a single patch beyond the Day 1 patch. Relative to other PC games, that's a rather low level of post-launch support, so here's hoping this promised upcoming patch is a biggie. How do you think Dice has handled the PC support after launch?

for the record spy guys isnt 100% correct. more than a dew server side fixes have been rolled out, just nothing client side yet

and I dont blame them for not rushing a patch before teams green and red had time to sort drivers so dice doesnt try and fix something that isnt broken

 

[DeadFred]

Whats really starting to get annoying is the USAS-12 with frag ammo. I've been devastated with that thing from like 20m away. And because of the suppression effect once the guy starts shooting at you, youre done. Thats going to be the new pos combo...USAS-12 + IRNV + Extended Ammo + Frag Ammo.

^THIS! I despise that setup. I ran into a couple of guys using that playing Metro Rush and they had the tunnels totally locked down.


Im feel the total opposite of you about the P90 vs PDW-R though. While Im far more accurate with the PDW-R, it is just too weak. Unless Im literally face to face with an enemy its useless. I do far better with the P90 spraying like a noob, especially at further distances.

My next goal is to unlock smoke with the M320. I just havent been able to bring myself to the depravity of noob-toobing yet.

 

[s44]

My next goal is to unlock smoke with the M320. I just havent been able to bring myself to the depravity of noob-toobing yet.

Grand Bazaar B, infantry version.

 

[DeadFred]

Grand Bazaar B, infantry version.

HeHe, yeah it gets hectic in that alley. Metro Conquest B would be another riot.

 

[GullyFoyle]

Gamespy -
Battlefieldo.com - HI-RES PANORAMIC BF3 MAP SCREENSHOTS

German site PCGames.de has created beautiful high resolution panoramic screenshots of all nine Battlefield 3 multiplayer levels, and boy are they gorgeous at a whopping 7000×2000 pixel resolution. Perfect for those of you with dual or triple monitor setups – these make pretty fantastic wallpapers.

Warning: each of these is several megabytes in size! To download, click the thumbnail, then right click and hit “view image” to see the full resolution version. Without further ado:


<follow the link for the rest of the screen shots>

Pretty cool, huh? You can read the original article here (in German) and they also have a download link for a ZIP of all 9 panoramas.

IGN.com - Battlefield 3: Second Opinions

IGN editors share their thoughts on October's big online battle.
November 17, 2011

by IGN Staff

Battlefield 3's fought through server woes, crashes, and glitches for its first three weeks in the wild. After giving Battlefield 3 a 9 in light of its stellar multiplayer, the servers have now stabilized, and other editors took up the fight and headed out into battle. So what did everyone else think? Read on to check out what the rest of the office thought of the game.

Battlefield 3 Video Review

Walter Lopez

To me, Battlefield 3 exists as two different experiences: the visually-stunning single-player experience and the massive-scale multiplayer. For the long time Battlefield fan, combat on this scale isn't anything too different, but for gamers new to the franchise - welcome to a whole new world of strategy. I honestly can't remember the last time I enjoyed a multiplayer experience to this extent. Shouting out enemy locations and coordinating attacks on a squad level is something unique to the Battlefield franchise and a welcome return to form.

Certain sections of the single player game echo back to my time in the service. Specifically, when the Marines are standing by, overlooking a target building, one radio transmission later and the attack order is acknowledged. Just as quickly as the command is confirmed, gunfire engulfs the advancing Marine element. The scene erupts with clusters of chaotic beauty unlike anything I've seen in a game before. Showcasing such a scene could only be accomplished with the combined efforts of brilliant visuals and sound design. You should be able to distinguish different caliber bullets and whether or not you're the unlucky recipient of a full metal jacket barrage (If you fancy yourself a weapon expert that is). Yes, the single player campaign is a bit over the top but don't let that steer you away from a great ride and one hell of a way to showcase what the Frostbite 2 engine is capable of.

The PC version shines above the rest, but the console versions aren't too far behind. Overall, I'm extremely pleased with the finished product and highly recommend picking it up. Just don't forget to shoot, move, and communicate.


Battlefield 3: How to Fly Jets


Charles Onyett

Battlefield 3, I wanted to enjoy your single-player campaign, I really did. I wasn't playing for review, so I could play at whatever pace I wanted to, and wouldn't have to take notes. I could play without knowing that whatever I thought might delight or enrage millions of readers. I could wage war in peaceful privacy.

But about an hour in, I quit. I didn't encounter any game-breaking bugs. I wasn't put off by the excess of quick-time events, though they were a little irritating. My hardware was close to top of the line, so even at Ultra Battlefield 3 ran very well. But after a few deaths, I shut down the game, skipped right by the co-op missions, and went directly to the multiplayer suite.

In the following two days I put 10 hours into the online modes, and plan on putting in a lot more. The maps are enormous and filled with hiding spots, the sound is absolutely incredible, the visuals are beautiful, the Conquest mode is, as it's always been, a thrill to play. As a fan of Battlefield since the original 1942, I couldn't be more pleased with Battlefield 3 online so far, aside from the stability issues with Battlelog. But a part of me feels ashamed.

As an editor at IGN, someone who gets paid to write about video games, shouldn't I play everything to broaden my perspective about what's out there? In general I'd say yes, I should, but in this case I just couldn't do it. Battlefield to me, and I think to many, is a multiplayer game, just as Quake III, Team Fortress 2 and Unreal Tournament are multiplayer games. Why does it feel like labeling something as multiplayer-only is a bad thing?

These days multiplayer-only shooters tend to be free-to-play. Team Fortress 2 went free, Battlefield: Heroes and Battlefield Play4Free are both running, and other free shooters like Tribes: Ascend and Blacklight: Retribution are on the way. There are exceptions too, like Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad. It's a brilliant multiplayer game, one that communicates the fragility of life in a war zone like no other. For some reason, Red Orchestra 2 also has a single-player mode, and it's terrible. I have to wonder, if Tripwire hadn't bothered with the single-player mode, could the studio have produced a more polished multiplayer suite? Same with Battlefield 3, if the single-player portion and co-op modes were tossed off the production schedule, maybe there'd be three or four more maps at launch? Five? Two? Based on recent comments, getting rid of single-player doesn't sound like something Electronic Arts wants, but as a fan, I'd like to see DICE focus on what it does so brilliantly: the online game.


Stephen Ng

It should to no surprise that BF3's best aspect is to hop into vehicles, roam around, and blast the enemy team. It's a great feeling to take down enemy vehicles, or use a vehicle to dominate the enemy team.

The weakest aspect of BF3 is the campaign. While the story is both solid and somewhat plausible (it unfolds like a Tom Clancy techno-thriller), the various gameplay mechanics (specifically, the ho-hum uncreative tone of everything) makes it a bland experience. There are no massive battles to partake in. There are almost no Hollywood-esque sequences (Semper Fidelis is as close as you're going to get). The cooperative missions seem like an after-thought, and hardly figure into the package.

If I wanted "virtualized realism," I'll re-read Tony Swofford's Jarhead, or a Chinese classic like Outlaws of the Marsh. As it stands, you're better off sticking to the MP aspect of BF3 and loving it.

Tina Palacios

Remember when a lot of people (including our own Peter Eykemans) mentioned how great the multiplayer is? They are correct. Battlefield 3 is all about the multiplayer. Don't mess with the campaign, or co-op; I have yet to find a reason to try them out. Since launch, I've been squading-up with friends and having a great time. Multiplayer still comes with a few gripes, though. For instance, the squad system needs to be improved—I've randomly been dropped from squads I join, and even got separated from friends after joining new matches together. And just so you know, it's an unnecessary pain in the ass to invite people to my friends list in-game for PC, then add them again through Origin. That said, neither of these issues hinder my desire to blow up buildings and attempt to fly jets. Now if only my teammates didn't spawn camp vehicles...


Scott Lowe

It hurts to say it, but Battlefield 3 is the first shooter to shake my undying love for Call of Duty.

I've always held both franchises in high regard, but Call of Duty was always my go-to. Now, with the addictive multiplayer experiences DICE have crafted with Battlefield 3, I've found myself sinking more hours into driving tanks and arming M-COMs than I have popping headshots and manning predator missile strikes.

What it comes down to is team-play and pacing.

There are no lone wolves in Battlefield. Even if you attempt to be one, you're likely to fail. More importantly, DICE has done a great job incentivizing players to work together.

With the scale of the maps and integration of vehicles, there is also a much wider array of gameplay experiences and strategies. And every match feels unique, no matter how many times you've played the map.

I'm also a huge audio/visual nerd, and DICE's Frostbite technology is absolutely stunning. No shooter has ever looked or sounded this good.

And let's be honest, the Call of Duty engine is starting to show its age.

I even disagree with much of the criticism of the campaign and co-op missions. Is the story predictable and are the themes played out? Of course, but that doesn't mean it isn't well executed.

But don't be confused, I'm not turning my back on Call of Duty. They are two very different games that cater to two very different moods. For team play and variety, Battlefield 3 will be my go-to, but for pure, unadulterated shooting fun, Call of Duty will always be there.

Trying to balance my time between two amazing shooters is a great problem to have.

 

[Destiny]

My Joystick I purchased recommended by GullyFoyle comes in tomorrow:

http://www.amazon.com/Thrustmaster-T...591824&amp;sr=1-17

I'll report back here or the other BF3 thread about my experience with it... hopefully I'll crash less and can keep the skys "friendly" for my team mates...

 

[M0oG0oGaiPan]

Anyone see this MAV video yet? Talk about OP on metro

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgLd2w3uuHU

lol omg i need to unlock this thing and learn how to fly it like nao

 

[clamum]

lol omg i need to unlock this thing and learn how to fly it like nao

Oh my fuckin god, LOL. Funny, but cheap as shit. I would've quit in about 2.2 seconds if I was on that server.

 

[Childs]

Im feel the total opposite of you about the P90 vs PDW-R though. While Im far more accurate with the PDW-R, it is just too weak. Unless Im literally face to face with an enemy its useless. I do far better with the P90 spraying like a noob, especially at further distances.

PDW-R does more damage at all ranges, and the spread seems tighter than the P90. The rate of fire is 750 vs 900, but in practice the PDW-R's higher damage and accuracy outweigh the P90's strengths IMO. Only other difference is the magazine size is 30 (extended) vs 50, but I find myself reloading with the PDW after I've killed the guys I needed to kill. With the P90, I sometimes have to reload during the battle. This is with Holo + Laser on both guns.

Traditionally, the P90s are usually always accurate with a high rate of fire, which makes it disappointing that it was short changed in BF3. Apparently they nerfed it too much from the beta, as it was really good then. But different strokes for different folks. Probably 70% of my gun battles are within 10m, and I lose them all the time with the P90, but not with the PDW-R.

 

[imaheadcase]

The MAV is hard to fly, at least to me. It has funky default controls. Not sure if you can change them..are they flying controls or what?

Metro the 2 person weapons for me are C4 and any machine gun. You can literally run up the steps of the choke point drop one kill yourself and take out2-4 each time. Of course that opens up the choke point for team, but no one cares they would rather camp.

I don't agree with lots of people, I think the Lone Wolf route works a lot in the game. Most the time the team is not even coordinating anyways.

I think team only applies to copters and tanks.

 

[DeadFred]

PDW-R does more damage at all ranges, and the spread seems tighter than the P90. The rate of fire is 750 vs 900, but in practice the PDW-R's higher damage and accuracy outweigh the P90's strengths IMO. Only other difference is the magazine size is 30 (extended) vs 50, but I find myself reloading with the PDW after I've killed the guys I needed to kill. With the P90, I sometimes have to reload during the battle. This is with Holo + Laser on both guns.

Traditionally, the P90s are usually always accurate with a high rate of fire, which makes it disappointing that it was short changed in BF3. Apparently they nerfed it too much from the beta, as it was really good then. But different strokes for different folks. Probably 70% of my gun battles are within 10m, and I lose them all the time with the P90, but not with the PDW-R.

Within 10m I can do very well with any of the pdw's. Its at longer ranges that I have difficulties. It doesnt bother me so much when I lose against an assault rifle or lmg, but it bugs the crap out of me when its against someone using the G36c. The G36c with its short 9inch barrel should be in the pdw class, its way overpowered in the game compared to the real world.

I prefer a run and gun play style so Im using the PDW's to rank up my recon class. I have just recently unlocked the P90 but its my fav pdw so far with the PDW-R and UMP45 coming in at close seconds.

From the looks of that MUAV video above, it seems I should learn to roadkill with it to really rank up the recon fast. LOL

 

[Zargon]

Within 10m I can do very well with any of the pdw's. Its at longer ranges that I have difficulties. It doesnt bother me so much when I lose against an assault rifle or lmg, but it bugs the crap out of me when its against someone using the G36c. The G36c with its short 9inch barrel should be in the pdw class, its way overpowered in the game compared to the real world.

no.....its still firing a rifle round, most of the rest of the PDW's are firing handgun ammo

really crzy 45acp(ump45) can get in the 6-700 ft/lb range

9mm into the 500's

5.56 nato is going to be over 1000 ft/lbs closer to 1500

almost double the energy so it should kill faster 'IRL' of course its a smaller bullet so it wont do as much damage to the acctual flesh in theory

 

[hondaf17]

Is anyone using Eyefinity and how does it work in the game? Does it actually expand your peripheral vision / field of view? Is it a major benefit to seeing / killing guys? I'm thinking of picking up 3 23'' 1080P monitors on BlackFriday.

I suppose then I'd probably need another 6950 for Xfire to run at a decent framerate?

 

[GullyFoyle]

New Battlefield Blog Post: Going Back to Karkand #5: Gameplay from Strike at Karkand, Assignments Explained

11/18/11 | By HBrun

Today, we have a brand new gameplay trailer from the reimagined Strike at Karkand map! Also, read on to find out how our new Assignments in Back to Karkand extend the persistence in Battlefield 3.

Battlefield 3: Strike at Karkand Gameplay (HD)

We hope you enjoy our new gameplay trailer with footage from Strike at Karkand. With the enhanced destruction in the Back to Karkand expansion pack, this all-time classic map has never looked or played better. For a trip down memory lane with the designer of the original Strike at Karkand map, see this earlier blog post.

10 all-new Assignments extend the persistence
The Back to Karkand expansion pack is much more than just maps. We are also adding a new layer of persistence in the form of ten Assignments. These will be tracked no matter if you play a base game map or expansion pack map, and add a new way to unlock things in the game.


The ten Assignments add a new layer of persistence. Click for full resolution image.

Let’s take a closer look at the “Let it Rain” Assignment. To complete this assignment, players must score 20 kills with Light Machine Guns and two mortar kills. The game will keep track of how far along you have come to fulfill it. When you have met the requirements, you will unlock a new Back to Karkand weapon (with a matching set of dog tags) to use on any map including the base game. You will also unlock the new Creeping Death Assignment.

As with all of the Assignments introduced in Back to Karkand, you can keep building towards these no matter if you play on regular maps or maps from the new expansion pack itself. Your regular persistence will also be intact and keep building up no matter what map you play – Back to Karkand is in this way completely integrated into the base game, including the ability to have a map rotation mixing base game maps with Back to Karkand maps.

The all-time classic map Strike at Karkand has never looked or played better.

Come back next week for more details on Back to Karkand. We have more videos coming your way, as well as more details on the new vehicles, weapons, and more.

As always, if you pre-ordered your copy of Battlefield 3: Limited Edition, you are entitled to Back to Karkand at no extra charge and will be notified in-game once it is available for download and play in December. Anyone can buy it on the launch day for $14.99/1200 Microsoft Points, or the equivalent in their local currency. PlayStation 3 players will have exclusive 1 week early access to Back to Karkand.

 

[llee]

Is anyone using Eyefinity and how does it work in the game? Does it actually expand your peripheral vision / field of view? Is it a major benefit to seeing / killing guys?

When you have Eyefinity enabled your field of view (FOV) increases and you'll be able to see more to your left and right (assuming 3x1 array). You can actually test this out before buying any of the monitors by playing the game in windowed mode and resizing the window.

 

[DeadFred]

no.....its still firing a rifle round, most of the rest of the PDW's are firing handgun ammo

really crzy 45acp(ump45) can get in the 6-700 ft/lb range

9mm into the 500's

5.56 nato is going to be over 1000 ft/lbs closer to 1500

almost double the energy so it should kill faster 'IRL' of course its a smaller bullet so it wont do as much damage to the acctual flesh in theory

The Magpul PDW-R uses the same 5.56x45 round but has a longer 10.5 - 12.5 inch barrel. Therefore it should be more powerful, and even slightly more so than the G36c at longer ranges, as a longer barrel increases terminal velocity. The small 5.56 round has to have high velocity to do its damage otherwise it goes straight through leaving a pin hole.

Watched the Military Channel's Ultimate Close Quarters Combat Weapons a while back, on the top ten list I think the G36c was #7 or 8. The P90 was at #5 and coming in at number one was the Kriss Super V which fires the same .45ACP as the UMP. Of course this pistol round is only effective out to about 100 meters, whereas the the 5.56 SBR's can reach out to 300m.

http://www.kriss-tdi.com/press/in-t...mate-weapons-close-quarter-battle-winner.html