Mines to explode only when driven over and disarmable - Page 5

Striker KOJ · 2013-03-15, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by zulu

How about the fact that it undermines the purpose of C4? Why cert into C4 when you can go the cheaper route of just taking mines? The potential damage against infantry doesn't really seem to balance that out.

Except it does nothing of the sort. There are other classes that can use C4. I have probably killed more tanks with my Medic and C4 than I have with an Engineer and Tank Mines, because that is MY choice. Nerf Medics, right, because their "intended role" was support, so they shouldn't be allowed to damage vehicles.

C4 can be used to instagib MAXes and infantry. Should we be railing against infantry mines becasue they "undermine the purpose of C4"? Or is that completely false because C4 has other purposes? Purposes that may or my not overlap with other items? Fuck, rocket launchers and greande launchers can instagib infantry, and at range, with no resource cost. Completely undermining the purpose of C4 right? Or are they completely different tools that may have some overlapping application?

So because one item with a proximity sesnsor is not another item with a remote trigger, we need to remove the proximity sensor? Why does that make sense? And why isn't this argument applied to anti personnel mines, which do the exact same thing as vehicle mines, except they kill YOU, and not your vehicle?

Next time you see somebody kill an infantry with a personnel mine, you better report them for abuse, because it undermines the purpose of rifles...

o Solei o · 2013-03-15, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by CraazyCanuck

Yes the bug where you can't get rid of the crazyglue covered mines is fun to experience. Happens several times in a play sesssion for me.

'this time' *nope* 'ok this time' *nope* 'dammit this time, before someone comes in' *nope* 'God dammit you mtfu drop to the f'ing ground already' *nope* 'arrghhh!!!! MTFU!!!' *nope* *bang bang*

Hah! Yep, that's it in a nutshell.

Originally Posted by Saintlycow

Literally all they had to fucking do was make a longer AT mine animation. 5 seconds to arm and drop. That way you can't instakill a sundy, or else you die in the explosion of the first mine.

Or they could have made the mines take 30 seconds to arm. If no one spots a mine in 30 seconds, you deserve to get blown the fuck up. Open your bloody eyes. Engineers can still defuse in this scenario

I could go for a compromise of dropping at the speed they do now, but taking 15 sec to arm. Still lets you get in under the wire in a last-second base deployment (important if anyone in the advancing zerg isn't sleeping), but lets people deal with em if dropped under a bumrushed sundy.

C4 does need to have a purpose, and it should be worth certing/carrying instead of hypos.

ComerEste · 2013-03-15, 12:29 PM

I agree this needed to change, but in my opinion it is only the result of the crappy system SOE put in to begin with. We told you guys back in beta to make mines like they were in PS1 cause we saw this coming. This change will make mines almost useless since the average person can only put down 2 mines. 2 mines are not enough to hinder vehicle movements, they simply go around them. Not to mention that most of the time you put them down, it's only after vehicles show up. Because putting them down before they show up, if they show up at all, will mean wasted resources as it takes 2 mines to blow up vehicles, so you have to put them on top of each other. So the area you can defend with mines is very tiny while battlefield is huge with many directions vehicles can attack from.

Lower the damage and resource cost of mines by like 80% and make the first cert rank into mines deploy up to 5, next rank 5 more, and the utility pouch ranks add 5 more per rank. So a heavily invested engineer can deploy up to 20 mines. The damage to vehicles should be like 2 mines to kill an ATV, 6 for Lightning, 8 for buggies, 10 for MBT, and 12 for Sundy. Each rank of mine guard should protect you from 1 additional mine per rank.

If you don't want to change mines to this, then why not do both versions? Have high damage mines that people can only put a total of 5 down along with mines that do low damage that you can deploy a total of 20. I bet you the low damage mines would win the popularity contest simply because they would actually do the job mines are supposed to do, which is slow enemy advances.

Also, the earlier posts about mine guard are so friggin on the money that it's painful to see SOE ignore them. People whine left n right about mines when they can spend 30 certs, the price of a damn scope on a gun, and instantly survive 2 mines. Another 50 certs and they will survive 3. A fully maxed out mine guard, which doesn't take long to get, makes mines laughable. When I deploy a Sundy, I switch to my M60 grenade launcher gunner seat and guard it. I kill LA/Engi's all the time and it usually takes a concerted effort to bring me down. Any AMS driver worth his salt will guard his or her own Sundy. SOE, you "fixing" this "problem" basically means your caving to people who refuse to learn how to play the game.

zulu · 2013-03-15, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by Kerrec

This is a matter of opinion.

I have 2x C4 certed on my Light Assault. I have 3x AV Mines certed on my Engineer.

I have run into situations where I'm playing my engineer and I think to myself, "Shit, wish I was playing my LA instead so I can C4 that <whatever>".

I can't recall ONE time when I'm playing my LA and I think to myself, "Shit, wish I was playing my Engineer so I can AV Mine that <whatever>".

No, that's not a matter of opinion -- it's a matter of rational analysis.

C4 is intended to blow up stationary targets. C4 is available for the Engineer, but take mines are not available for the Light Assault, so whether or not you purchased C4 for your LA is irrelevant. Why would the Engineer ever cert into C4, when for half the cost he can cert into tank mines and take out most targets he wants to blow up far more efficiently?

So seeing as C4 is not at as good at its intended role as a cheaper alternative available to the same class: Yes -- it OBVIOUSLY undermines C4's role in the game.

C4 is MUCH more versatile than an AV mine

The only things it can do that an AV Mine can't do are:
1) Blow up Phalanx turrets
2) Blow up infantry (and doing this with AV mines is possible, if difficult)
But seeing as, even before the latest patch, taking out tanks and sunderers netted far more XP, and blowing up these other targets are really rather niche given the cost of C4 (less so for the Phalanx, I suppose), tank mines are just clearly the better option for an engineer looking to blow up stuff.

and can be used by alot more classes.

That doesn't matter in the slightest. Rocket launchers can only be used by the HA class, but if I came to you and said, "Rockets are OP," a good response would not be "Oh, but only the Heavy Assault can use them." That's totally irrelevant.

AV mines are only available to the engineer, and using it as improvised C4 against anything but a vehicle is not easy or costs a grenade (so the overall resource cost is larger than C4).

Attaching C4 to a tank is difficult. Just as difficult or moreso than throwing frisbee mines at it. And the opportunity cost of losing the grenade is minimal, especially seeing as you can change your loadouts in an instant in this game.

I don't buy into the whole "AV mines undermine C4" argument. It's rubbish.

I think that's because you don't understand the argument, its foundations, or its implications.

ComerEste · 2013-03-15, 01:26 PM

Another thing people fail to realize is the end result of this change. Because I don't want my Sundy to be insta-killed by mines, I have Mine Guard. Which makes me vulnerable to all other damage sources: HA's rockets, LA's C4, tanks, and aircraft. If this change goes in, I will be switching to Blockade Armor which reduces damage from ALL SOURCES. So not only will my deployed Sundy be immune to mines, but I will be shrugging off the other damage sources. Combine all that with decent AMS drivers like me who stay with their Sundy to protect/repair it and the troops that spawn at them, Sundies will be nigh impossible to kill.

Kerrec · 2013-03-15, 02:36 PM

Originally Posted by zulu

No, that's not a matter of opinion -- it's a matter of rational analysis.

C4 is intended to blow up stationary targets. C4 is available for the Engineer, but take mines are not available for the Light Assault, so whether or not you purchased C4 for your LA is irrelevant. Why would the Engineer ever cert into C4, when for half the cost he can cert into tank mines and take out most targets he wants to blow up far more efficiently?

So seeing as C4 is not at as good at its intended role as a cheaper alternative available to the same class: Yes -- it OBVIOUSLY undermines C4's role in the game.

The only things it can do that an AV Mine can't do are:
1) Blow up Phalanx turrets
2) Blow up infantry (and doing this with AV mines is possible, if difficult)
But seeing as, even before the latest patch, taking out tanks and sunderers netted far more XP, and blowing up these other targets are really rather niche given the cost of C4 (less so for the Phalanx, I suppose), tank mines are just clearly the better option for an engineer looking to blow up stuff.

That doesn't matter in the slightest. Rocket launchers can only be used by the HA class, but if I came to you and said, "Rockets are OP," a good response would not be "Oh, but only the Heavy Assault can use them." That's totally irrelevant.

Attaching C4 to a tank is difficult. Just as difficult or moreso than throwing frisbee mines at it. And the opportunity cost of losing the grenade is minimal, especially seeing as you can change your loadouts in an instant in this game.

I think that's because you don't understand the argument, its foundations, or its implications.

I clearly stated that I have C4 on my LA and AV Mines on my engineer. I also stated that I have frequently run into situations where I wished I was playing LA with C4 when I was playing Eng with Mines. The opposite is rarely if ever true. This, based on my playstyle and cert progress, shows ME that I much prefer to have C4 than Mines in every situation EXCEPT attacking Sunderers. I did not bring up the LA vs. Engineer for any other reason than to show I have been in situations where I wished I was the other. Eng. vs. LA is irrelevant.

C4 is intended to blow up stationary targets? So when I fly onto a moving tank with my LA, drop 2 C4 and blow it up WHILE IT IS MOVING, does that mean that C4 is stepping on the role of AV Mines? Are you then going to propose to SOE that C4 not stick to anything that moves?

You pigeonhole roles to C4 and AV mines that are absurd to me. That is why I think your whole argument is a question of opinion. I do not agree that mines = moving only and C4 = not moving. That is like saying you can't ever use your HA dumbfire rocket to kill infantry because that is not what it is meant to do. In fact, HA dumbfire rocket fired at infantry would be stepping on the toes of grenades and grenade launchers, if everyone was to be inflexible like you.

C4 will never be inferior to AV mines because AV mines are grossly restricted in comparison. Or in other words, C4 is MUCH more versatile.

C4 can stick to any surface. Because of that, you can attack air vehicles with it. I've seen videos of an LA dropping from a Galaxy, drop 2 C4 on a Liberator and detonate it for the kills. That is IMPOSSIBLE with AV Mines.

I personally put C4 on walls or ceilings so they are harder to notice and less likely to be triggered by grenades or bullets.

If I know an armor column is heading up the road, I will choose to use C4 before AV mines. Why? Because I can watch and CHOOSE what vehicle to kill. Don't want to kill that Flash driving in the forefront of the column? Let it go, wait for a MBT before hitting the trigger. Not possible with AV mines.

C4 can be thrown where you know a gaggle of infantry is located and trigger it without having to expose yourself to their fire. Especially useful with LA that get on rooftops, but still possible with other classes. An engineer with AV mines can do the same, but would have to throw a grenade and hope it bounces properly, or expose himself to shoot at the AV mines.

The only time I will choose Engineer with AV mines over LA with C4 is if I want to kill a Sunderer because C4 is superior overall.

Your argument that AV mines > C4 is absurd.

Rothnang · 2013-03-15, 02:45 PM

I think this is a great change.

Explosive weapons that you can simply slap on a target and kill it are idiotic in this game. That kind of weapon is based on the idea of high risk/high reward, but there is no freaking risk in it, since death doesn't matter.

Wahooo · 2013-03-15, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by Rothnang

I think this is a great change.

Explosive weapons that you can simply slap on a target and kill it are idiotic in this game. That kind of weapon is based on the idea of high risk/high reward, but there is no freaking risk in it, since death doesn't matter.

If this is the issue AT mines are HARDLY the biggest offender.

WarbirdTD · 2013-03-15, 03:53 PM

I too cannot wait for Tank Mines to be relegated to complete uselessness. Good job guys, but I think the game needs to be dumbed down a bit more. Maybe just make Sunderers take no damage from anything while deployed? That'd make defense MUCH more fun. Maybe we can make it to where NO ONE will defend and see how fast the game crumbles?

maradine · 2013-03-15, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by WarbirdTD

Good job guys, but I think the game needs to be dumbed down a bit more.

That phrase doesn't mean what you think it does. This has been a public service announcement.

To the point, mines will now be used for what they are arguably intended - approach management and area denial. Personally, I find the roadside 12x kill far more delicious than 0x-1x tower-side gank.

Silent Thunder · 2013-03-15, 04:51 PM

Hell I would argue that mines that can be thrown off the side of a cliff ontop of tanks is the epitome of both dumbing down and poor foresight on the dev who designed it in the first place. After all mines are supposed to be a directional charge (and before you give me that Nanites crap, the whole point of a directional charge is for better armour penetration, which something designed to damage a tank or APC would damn well need.), and it makes no sense for a directional charge that can simply be thrown out windows/offcliffs/run and throw. Im also agreeing with those that say mines should have damage signifigantly reduced, but also the amount carried should be dramatically increased. So you can make those things called.. oh what was the word? Right. Minefields.

maradine · 2013-03-15, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by Silent Thunder

So you can make those things called.. oh what was the word? Right. Minefields.

We once sowed 16 AT mines into the crop rows at Shadespire Farms. I don't think any of them ever went off, but that wasn't the point. That was our farm.

Wahooo · 2013-03-15, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by Silent Thunder

Hell I would argue that mines that can be thrown off the side of a cliff ontop of tanks is the epitome of both dumbing down and poor foresight on the dev who designed it in the first place. After all mines are supposed to be a directional charge (and before you give me that Nanites crap, the whole point of a directional charge is for better armour penetration, which something designed to damage a tank or APC would damn well need.), and it makes no sense for a directional charge that can simply be thrown out windows/offcliffs/run and throw. Im also agreeing with those that say mines should have damage signifigantly reduced, but also the amount carried should be dramatically increased. So you can make those things called.. oh what was the word? Right. Minefields.

right but these proposed changes don't address this. Only that they need a target to roll over them rather than proximity detonate on a stationary target.
You can still frisbee them off a cliff and when the tank moves it dies. THAT hasn't been solved... only the non-issue of killing the over abundant, easily replaced, otherwise hard to kill, very easily countered by mine guard with 350 certs, deployed AMS has been solved.

Silent Thunder · 2013-03-15, 05:13 PM

Even then you shouldn't be arguing for a return to the old system, but rather for a proper minefield system. Hell we finally managed to get the Lattice back (albiet in a slightly odd form), why not proper minefields.

ChipMHazard · 2013-03-15, 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by Silent Thunder

Even then you shouldn't be arguing for a return to the old system, but rather for a proper minefield system. Hell we finally managed to get the Lattice back (albiet in a slightly odd form), why not proper minefields.

Agreed. IMO, this isn't about going back to how it worked in PS1 but to promote a change that would make actual minefields not only a possibility but a requirement for effective use of mines.