I'm going to suspect a lot of people just rushed into this post to decry the overpowered tank and personnel mine... And thank you! Now that I have your attention... Mines are currently taking a lot of heat for their abilities, and agree or disagree, there is one issue that is completely unrelated to power, that we need to address (That is to say, that if you have come here to post about how overpowered something is because it blew up you or your sunderer, leave now... yes I drew you in here under false pretenses... you have to admit that was funny). That thing is Numbers. If mines are to receive a nuking, something that needs to be done, is that it needs to be allowed that we carry more mines and that they cost less. We'll just use Tank mines as our running example. Currently C4 kills infantry rather handily. It costs 100 resources, but it'll kill someone who walks infront of it. Mines at 75 resources will kill a sunderer or something else if you drop enough of them immediately beneath the vehicle, assuming they didn't invest in mineguard. That said, making it so that we have to drop them near sunderers or tanks or whatever, so that the vehicle will run them over at speed, means that you have to use tank mines more as a blockade tool. Not to mention they will not be able to be used for Max suite kills anymore, so their use, being diminished, means that they need to have that resource drop. Ideally they would get to just be a regular item that you could resupply with an engi ammo pack and take a larger hit to damage. One HA can kill a vehicle with a rocket launcher. One LA can kill a max with C4. One infiltrator can kill you with a shot to the head. Tank mines, should be carried in sufficent quantity that they can kill a sunderer. Now that said, we need to have something that will counter them. There is talk that only engineers can disarm them, but if that is the case, engineers also need to be able to detect them more readily. Some kind of tool will need to be put in, that will allow this. I would also say, that since Mine removal is dangerous, someone should not necessarily be assured that tank mine disarm. Any thoughts, or ideas?
Just make it so that you have to drive over the mine for it to explode, then every sundy wouldn't be forced to have mineguard so then your mines would be stronger. Resupply mines from engis ammo pack? you want engineers with infinite mines? really? I want infinite c4 on my medic, and rockets to me HA.
Sure, if, as I said in my post, they take a hit to damage. If it takes 10 mines to take out a MBT, then I think you should be able to carry at least 10, when upgraded all the way. That is in line with all other classes. As to your statement about Infinite rockets... You already have that effectively. By making tank mines another item, that can be resupplied, you effectively possess infinite of that item. Just like ammo and rockets are now, since every other person I've seen on waterson (Every 3rd some days) is an engineer, it isn't exactly difficult to find an ammo drop
Infinite mines is no good - too many reasons to explain. But if mines cost say 10 infantry resources, and required 10 mines to kill a MBT, then that'd be a fair trade. Carrying capacity could be 20 mines or so. Platoons would be able to dedicate themselves to mining roads and minefields would exist.
The problem with the mines in their current implementation is that their number is not big enough to be used as an area denial tool. With one mine per engineer (or two with pouch) you can't effectively mine a area. You can certainly trap a road or an obvious point of approach, but that's it. The reason people use mineguard these days is not because they are afraid that they will hit a mine in their way towards a point. The mines are so few and so expensive that people only use them for guaranteed kills (or with high probability). Once the new discussed on reddit changes regarding mines come to pass, the mineguard will become obsolete. The mandatory protection cert will be the blockade, which protects from the increasing amount of launchers plus it gives some minimal protection against C4. If they only change the way the mines activate and get destroyed, then the end result will be that noone will use them, when they can use C4 instead. The good news is that the few people who will actually bother, will probably get guaranteed kills, since noone will drive with mineguard (when even now people refuse to use 30 certs to neutralise 2 mines, imagine when there will be no reason to do it).
How exactly what you describe would be a deterrent for an armored column? If it takes a non mineguarded vehicle 10 mines to die, it means that it needs 70 for a fully mineguarded. Also, do you see yourself bothering setting up such a minefield? Area denial is not giving the driver free repair exp by relaxly strolling around fully knowing there is no way he or his vehicle are in any danger. Area denial is when he knows that if he steps in that area he'll lose the vehicle or he'll die or both. We tried deterrents with the early adaptation of AA for air vehicles. That didn't work at all, so we have today some pretty strong AA deterrents. (Speaking for myself, the only way I would bother to setup a proper minefield would be if 1 mine would guaranteed killing a vehicle outright. Then with 20 mines per engineer you could have an area denied for vehicles, until it got minesweeped by infantry or a mineguarded vehicle paved the way.)
#1 i believe that it would be a simple solution. the devs have said before, that maxed out players should have no more than a 10% to 20% advantage over new players in terms of certs/equipment. obviously false, but if we stick to this premise, mineguard will obviously be toned down. from 10 mines to die, to say 15. #2 yes, because in combination with other changes to make gameplay more linear (so that fights are more concentrated and the zerg can't just punch through diluted defenses, because defends have so many respawn options once a base is lost), the fear of encountering a minefield would be a significant worry. if mines did not detonate from random explosions, and required a MBT certed with "minesweeper" (say 50 certs to swap your main cannon for a minesweeping tool that blows up all mines in a SMALL AOE around your tank, then this idea will go far, AFAIK.
I understand your point, but mines should be area denial, obstacles. You shouldn't be able to ignore mines, you should have to deal with the possbility that they can lock down a location. And especially if they are made so that you have to be moving when you go over them, you should be able to conceivably lock down a bridge or a road. Ignoring mines entirely, what you say about Mineguard becoming obsolete, that I find repugnant. Not in the stating, I agree with you, I find it horrible that, that is going to happen. I regularly use mines to blow up sunderers too. A feature and an upgrade like that, should be something you take into consideration when deciding your loadout. It should never be taken as read, that one feature has become "Obsolete" because they nerfed something into oblivion.
I'm not sure how aware you are regarding the planned changes. There is no mention regarding numbers carried and power of the mines. What we do know is that they plan to have mines activated by movement only and that any kind of fire (bullets, cannon fire etc) will disintegrate the mines instead of exploding them. What you described earlier is what I do when I drive in a mineguarded vehicle and step on mines. I stop, repair 5 seconds, move on. There is zero deterrent in me altering my path because there is a minefield around. Now imagine a vehicle that can survive 20 times the amount of mines a non mineguarded vehicle can survive now, as you propose. It's like giving to my already strong mineguarded vehicle four times the mine resistance. Mines would just be bumps on the road that could be easily ignored. And if you can ignore them, why bother setting them up in the first place?
I really doubt that you have an entire outfit of people who both set up minefields all the time yet pine for a future in which they could run around dispensing dozens of largely ineffective mines each in the hopes of catching the one tank driver with the IQ of a Cocker Spaniel that wont stop to repair his tank after running over the 5th/50th mine.
Your outfit randomly spreads an area with just one mine per spot? I find that hard to believe. I'm more inclined to believe that your outfit drops pair of mines on a road or avenue of approach that you're expecting enemies. Right now we can't lock down an area with mines, but we can certainly trap some obvious paths. The catch? Each engineer can only set one effective mine without the pouch and two with it (more if they combine with C4, but that strategy will become obsolete with the upcoming changes).
I know about the dev's proposed changes to mines. I am proposing an extended set of changes. Read my post again, I will underline for you, since you have ADHD. in case you still dont get it, if my changes are implemented, obviously mineguard will be made less effective. minefields would be a "sure die zone", rather than the current "sigh, a random mine on this particular spot the road, what were the chances?!" so really, you need to turn the "bad luck" into "poor logistical decision" of not having a minesweeper.
A.) Seriously, I think you are being gracious there with the IQ of your average MBT driver. I'd say purse dog would be more accurate, Cocker Spaniels can at least Fetch. B.) No, no one is Looking forward to the tank mine nerf, but it'll happen 10-1. If that is the case, people who Use mines need something to balance this out, elsewise we are nerfing tank mines and mineguard out of existence. I see the large volume of tank mines no different from organized annihalator squads though. With the lock ons with low damage, you have a 1 in 7 (Varies however many is in the squad, but we'll say 7) chance of being that person who gets the grand XP payoff, and a 6/7 chance of getting nothing. I do think they would be used for area denial if they were given something like this in conjunction with the damage nerf. Infact I would welcome the damage nerf if that were the case. Seriously, a nerf and a buff should be much preferred over a straight nerf.
We've mined whole bridges and roads up and down from base to base, along avenues we knew people were going to travel. Enough to take out mineguard sundies. When you get 7 engineers with upgraded satchel, laying 4 mines a piece, it works.
I'm too old for ADHD. Why would you bother putting a minesweeper module that destroys mines when with the proposed changes any type of fire will erase them? Why would you even bother to shoot them in the first place? Somebody bothered to give you some free driving exp, you might as well step on them, it's not like your vehicle will explode before it bumps into a track load of them. You're proposing a change to the proposed changes. The developers can change their mind at any time of course, but at this point it would make sense to think about changes that they haven't touched, like number of mines and power of mines. They have already declared that mines will disintegrate by any type of damage on them with no explosion.
Yes and no. Actually when you are mining like that, you have to space them outsomewhat, enough that they aren't in each other's blast radius, or you get the bridge going up, and killing 1 sunderer, and a few confused groundhogs. For that reason it's better to put them in a grid. I do know what you are talking about, putting two down about 5m apart, and for a single mine layer you are right, but if you are using them for area denial and to lock down a path, it doesn't make as much sense. Now, the system they are purposing will make it so that mines can't be set off via explosives... in that world, you will absolutely see mines grouped within the same meter, something people seem to be either ignoring or ignorant of.
I guess you do have ADHD. Read again. Slowly, don't get distracted! Let me spell it out bit by bit Mines are cheaper. Waaay cheaper. 10 infantry resources or so. 10 mines to kill a non mineguarded MBT. 12 to destroy a sunderer without mineguard. 15 mines to destroy a maxed out mineguard MBT. 17 to destroy max mineguard sunderer. Engineer carrying capacity very large. How large, it is up to the devs/you/whoever. However, maximum number of mines on the battlefield per engineer is extremely large, say 50 or so. Mines no longer get destroyed by explosions or small arms fire. Requires the minesweeper MBT to destroy, or driving over. This way: minefields would be tedious to lay out and require significant coordination (access to weapons terminal e.g. from sunderer nearby) and require quite a bit of time and preparation work. ~150 mines per minefield if not more. Minefields would deny entry to any column without a minesweeper leading the bunch. The minesweeper would have a significant sacrifice of not having a primary weapon for his tank. -> requires effort to deploy minefield -> can easily die in process -> requires effort to thwart minefield -> can easily die in process Win?
I think we're wandering into too many with 50. If it requires X to destroy a sunderer, you should be able to Cary X, X-1, or X+1. I think with sufficent damage reduction X (0.5) could be made, as a case, but at 50, you become a 1 man solution to Armor zerg.
