Remember, Remember The 5th Of November. The Gunpowder, Treason, And Plot. I Know Of No Reason Why The

I thought the whole point of the Punisher vs Bullseye comic was Lester throwing prep to Castle all day long. Also Greatest Hits.

These two know everything about each other. By some greater mean they are pitted against each other in a city unknown to them. Who would win? The Joker vs Bullseye ?

Here’s Bullseye attacking 2 of the best martial artists in the world (Daredevil and Elektra) and one of the best assassins in the world (Black Widow, who is also not too shabby in the hand to hand department) plus a novice white tiger.

He then fights with Elektra. Then Elektra AND Daredevil. And when they still cannot beat him he cheeses it and he ends up getting hit by a bus which finally puts him down.

there’s absolutely ZERO chance of some clown beating Bullseye. Bullseye could kill him with a toothpick. A shoe. A tic tac. A bit of fingernail. A tooth. And if he was bored enough he could simply beat joker with his feet and hands because he’s lethal as fuck. It doesn’t matter if they know all about each other. This is a fight not a quiz.

Bullseye 100/100

Don’t get me wrong, i just thought about giving the smaller gun to the more “spy-ish” of the couple. In my mind, GRU is more prone of carrying big guns (in fact, my protagonist is a sniper, but just carry the vintorez around when he is about to snipe), on the other hand, KGB is seen as more cover, more tricky, and i see more fit to give her a smaller and (i thought) more reliable gun. My story is set between 1989 and 1995, everywhere from Moscow to Libya, but mainly on Germany, and my doubts are if i should use the weapons to give information about the characters (bulk and old fashioned for him, and slender and versatile for her), or explain the character by their weapon choice (smart, professional and crazy prepared vs stick to what is issued to her, retorting to improvisation) or even don’t get into the specifics of weaponry just settling with generic guns, and let the reader guess if he is firing a glock or a walter ppk. I’m also concerned about the problems that can arise if someone catch my characters on the late 80s Western Germany carrying russian guns, but i should research the german weapons around by that dates. Thank you for your time.

Hello, my character is a spetsnaz GRU working with a female KGB companion, should he use a Tokarev and leave a Makarov to the girl? Both with Maks as is a more modern model? Maybe he can keep his GRU sidearm for cover ops, or it will hint too much that he is a spy? Thoughs, please.

As I’ve said several times before, smaller guns deliver more recoil into the user. There’s less mass in the pistol to counter the force of the bullet, so that’s passed on to the user regardless of their gender. As a result, when fired, heavier guns are actually easier to control.

The problem is, I have no idea when you’re setting your story, and if you’re asking, “what gun should my characters use?” Then “what year is it?” becomes a very important question to answer.

The Makarov PM was designed, to be a replacement for the Tokarev TT. The Tokarev entered service in the 1930s, and left production in the fifties. The Soviet military spent the next decade replacing the aging TT-33s with new PMs.

This means, after the mid-sixties, you wouldn’t see a Tokarev in service as an official sidearm.

The GRU was formed in 1949. So that puts it solidly in an era when the Tokarev was in service. The KGB was founded in 1954, two years after the Tokarev left production. The Makarov entered production in 1951.

So that, roughly sets your story sometime between 1955 and 1963. If it’s not, then all of these assumptions start to fall apart.

As with the Tokarev, the Makarov isn’t a great pistol. The Russian military has been looking for an opportunity to replace it since at least the eighties. In fact, modern Spetsnaz units don’t even use Makarovs, they transitioned over to the PSS in the early 80s. My understanding is that KGB and the later FSB also transitioned to the PSS, but I’m not entirely certain.

The Lebedev PL-14, MP-443 “Grach,” and MP-448 “Skyph” were all developed with the goal of becoming the new Russian military service pistol. I’m honestly not familiar with the internal politics that have affected their decisions, though I believe the Grach was adopted as a service pistol sometime in the last decade.

Of course, you couldn’t give a KGB agent any of those guns, because the Committee for State Security was dissolved along with the rest of the Soviet Union in 1991. It’s successor, the Federal Security Service (FSB) was founded in 1995. There’s nothing stopping you from giving an FSB agent a Grach or Skyph and calling it good. (The Lebedev hasn’t entered production yet.)

Interestingly, the push for a replacement pistol actually predates the fall of the Soviet Union. So, even if you’re using an alt history setting, where the Soviet Union never fell, you’re still probably looking at new pistols, that never existed in our world.

You don’t pick guns based on the gender of the shooter. With military weapons, you choose them based on the politics and doctrines that shaped their design and acceptance.

-Starke

This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron.

But you didn't learn to count from 0

List of things I’ve learnt studying computer science and programming.

1. Computers are shit.

2. If you ever think you are dumb, why? Computers are literally just bits of fucking sand and people still love them.

3. You can’t trust humans.

4. You can’t trust yourself.

5. you can’t trust data.

6. forget about trust.

7. words don’t look right after you read them a million times over

8. programmers are gods

9. programmers are fucking stupid

10. hate

11. I’ve wasted my life

Always!!

Yeah, dude, that remarks are a pain in the neck... https://media.tenor.com/images/e7ff5147b8858e23b2f86f37346ed0fe/tenor.gif

Just to point that GRU never was part of KGB (that is a separation which i want to made patent in my book). GRU is military intelligence, it is around since 1918 and by the name since 1942 and is still active (kinda SEAL team 6). KGB on the other hand is just civil intelligence (much like CIA) with both national (KGB) and international (SVR) reach. Anyway, cause the Red Room project she can be a full fledged agent at age of 9.

The problem I have with Natasha being born in 84/a full fledged KGB agent is that the MCU follows real-world history relatively closely. The Soviet Union collapsed in '91. If she was born in 84, there's actually no way she could have been a full-fledged KGB agent. It's just not possible. She could potentially be SVR RF or GRU (most likely GRU), but it just isn't possible for her to have been KGB at the age of 7.

I’m not going to say it could never happen, but I do doubt it. The screenwriters for CA:TWS (and CA:CW and A:IW) were asked a question about Natasha’s age before CA:TWS came out:

The comics obviously have this history between Winter Soldier and Black Widow, although Black Widow, as far as we know, was not born in WWII. Was there a different way you could approach that dynamic between them?

CM: They have crossed paths.SM: Yeah, we will leave it at that. But yeah, we acknowledge all of that stuff. We get it, but it’s—CM: Then you wind up in Infinity Formula territory where everyone is a 100 years old. That’s a strange world. [X]

So I really do doubt that Natasha is going to turn out to be secretly older. Which brings me to your point about the KGB. I think there is an easy explanation for why she said KGB.

Ease of storytelling.

Listen I’m a history nerd so this annoys me too, but what it boils down to is this: if you say “KGB” audiences around the world know instantly who you are talking about. And more importantly, audiences of English-language popular culture know that the KGB are the “bad guys”. If Natasha had sat there and said GRU, the vast majority of the audience would have no idea what she was talking about, and they would have had to extend the scene for her to explain to Steve (and the audience) what that was which would have A. increased the running time and B. dampen the emotional punch of her line. So from a storytelling pov, it makes perfect sense to use the KGB even when it makes no historical sense at all. 

I think that if we ever get some sort of explanation for her line in the future, it is much more likely that the filmmakers would explain it one of two ways:

the MCU’s KGB continue on after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and never split into the GRU and the SVR RF like in our world

Parts of the KGB - like Department X - went underground either after the failed August coup or when the Belavezha Accords was signed.

Either explanation could work and the difference between our world and the MCU could easily (and conveniently) be explained/blamed on HYDRA manipulating events from the shadows.