Remove STI 2011, P-3AT, PF-9, M714, Taurus Spectrum, ZPAP 85, .40 PPQ, .40 90-two, P230, ARX-160, CX4, Saiga 410

[Holli-Git]

Summary

Bugfixes "Removes a few handguns, rifles, and a shotgun that didn't meet inclusion criteria"

Purpose of change

After doing #76714, I compiled a list of guns that do not meet our criteria for inclusion. There was a lot and it was over a pretty wide variety of guns.

Gunbroker stats

STI 2011

For the life of me I couldn't find any other double stack 19/2011s, the closest was the EAA Hunter which didn't make the cut either.

P-3AT/PF-9


IIRC Tonk added these and both had a description of them being common so I'm a bit hesitant to remove em.

M714

It seems to be a rare item so I didn't apply the gun filter to be nice and yeah, it's not cutting it.

Taurus Spectrum

ZPAP 85

I was going to axe the M90 too, but realized it passed. Still had some redundant groups though.

.40 90-two

.40 PPQ

P230

Majority of P230s seem to be 9mm or 380.

ARX-160

These are all .22 LR. While there seems to be some military use, the list of users is pretty short and America isn't really mentioned past some trials.

CX4

Saiga 410

Describe the solution

Removes em.

Describe alternatives you've considered

Not removing em.

Testing

Before:

After:

Note that the M90 was in the original as I intended to replace it, but I have undone it since.

Additional context

[AudBobb]

Oh boy I can see the reddit posts already

[NetSysFire]

Please be a bit more specific with your PR description. "Gun removals" is not very helpful in a changelog.

[Holli-Git]

Please be a bit more specific with your PR description. "Gun removals" is not very helpful in a changelog.

How would you like me to be more specific? The guns removed, why guns are removed? I'm always a bit unsure how much detail I need to put into them so I go on the short side

[Nebnis]

"Removed x and x and x because there is not enough hits in gunbrokers"

[NetSysFire]

I recommend imagining your PR description in the changelog if you are having trouble gauging whats right. Take this one for example: https://github.com/CleverRaven/Cataclysm-DDA/releases/tag/cdda-experimental-2024-10-20-1406

"Gun removals" would stick out because it is very vague with no details. Look through more changelogs if you'd like and you can get a feeling for what level of detail is appropriate.

[Holli-Git]

"Gun removals" would stick out because it is very vague with no details. Look through more changelogs if you'd like and you can get a feeling for what level of detail is appropriate.

Is this better?

[NetSysFire]

Yes. Personally I'd likely use something like "remove mistakenly included guns" or similar to make it clear that these should probably never have existed in the first place. But this is all subjective now.

[Holli-Git]

Yes. Personally I'd likely use something like "remove mistakenly included guns" or similar to make it clear that these should probably never have existed in the first place. But this is all subjective now.

I didn't do that as at one point these weren't mistakenly included as the criteria didn't exist, even if the specific guns were very odd choices. Not trying to say your idea was wrong, just wanting to explain my thinking, if it is of any use.

[x-qq]

Out of the entire list, Cx4 is the only useful thing.

It is sad to see it go.

[Holli-Git]

Out of the entire list, Cx4 is the only useful thing.

Eh we have the Sub 2000, which is pretty similar and takes glock mags

[kevingranade]

Regarding the summary, this one would be a "None".
If anything these removals (in aggregate) would boil down to something like "Applied objective criteria for gun appearance rates to prevent oddball guns dominating spawns."

I took a few minutes to review the gunbroker stats, mostly because you expressed some concern yourself.

STI 2011 - This one is a pain, STI calls 2011 their "platform" and they seem very willing to brand what would normally be considered variants of the same gun as different gun lines based on relatively small changes like slightly different barrel lengths. This means no one "model" meets our inclusion criteria, but in aggregate they would do so easily. What we have in the game though is the "DS" which is not only discontinued but apparently not that popular in the first place, so no issue with the removal.

P3AT I was able to widen it a bit by searching for KelTek pistols chambered in .380, which all seem to be P3ATs, but it still only had ~50 hits.

PF9 again shows up under KelTek/9mm, but in far less than the requisite numbers. It looks like if you smushed together the P11, PF9, and P15 into one gun it would barely scrape by? There's some amount of that we could look at doing so that if you have many similar subcompact pistols that individually miss the threshold you can still have some representation for that "genre" of gun, but that requires something more than just the threshold based approach we have now so it's not pertinent for this issue.

Ideally we'd have a big table of guns and their characteristics and gunbroker stats, and could use that to highlight types of guns that are common enough in aggregate to share a spot on the spawn tables.

As for the rest the Siaga 410 surprised me but my search agreed with yours, .410 is just really not that popular.

[NetSysFire]

Obsoleting (and thus migrating) a good amount of items is definitely not a "None" in terms of the PR description for the changelog.

[AudBobb]

should probably have an obseletion tag no?

[NetSysFire]

This PR properly obsoletes many items. I do not know what you mean with "obseletion tag". It is normally not specifically marked in the changelog or the PR title.

[AudBobb]

I mean a category in the changelog for obseletions. So instead of [Bugfix "removes item name"] we could do [Obsoleted "item name"], because having something like this as a "None" doesn't make sense, but it's also not really a bugfix. It's an obseletion.

[NetSysFire]

Probably Content as a category as it affects content.

[Holli-Git]

I've been putting it as bugfixes due to my definition of a bug being an unwanted/unintended feature, and and obsoletions remove unwanted features such as really rare guns

[Holli-Git]

I get wanting to combat bloat, but ideally there should be a way for very uncommon guns to be in the game. These guns exist IRL, so the most immersive implementation would be balancing their rarity so maybe you come across one once in a blue moon, in the basement of some foreign war veteran or something.

It adds flavor and variety, which is one of CDDA:s core strengths.

A) My intention isn't combatting bloat. I'm not removing guns for the sake of it, I'm removing it because they don't fit.

B) I never understood why there is so much uproar about the uncommon guns. We don't have much common guns. There are so many guns out in the world and it seems a portion of CDDA players only care about the very uncommon ones. We quite literally don't have enough common guns to make the uncommon ones uncommon. I'm not talking about ARs or Glocks for common guns either, I'm talking R92s, HiPoint Carbines, Ruger PCCs. That's another reason I'm removing all of these guns, it makes it a whole lot easier to clean up item groups and implement guns that actually make reasonable sense to find in the USA. And also, just so happens removing guns is easier than adding them, so I did those first.

C) There is nothing stopping you from working in the uncommon guns that would still fit the games inclusion criteria. It's not my job to bend to your will.

[RenechCDDA]

A reminder to those coming from off-site that our gun policy (the one which allows us to have 300+ separate firearms and hundreds more variants) is the result of years of discussion. The idea of adding or keeping impossible to find things to the game is not a new one, and it is an idea that has been soundly rejected.