SOE appeasing simpletons? (Mines)

Discussion in 'Engineer' started by asdfPanda, Apr 3, 2013.

  1. Veri

    How is my sentence an argument when I was not arguing a point or arguing with anyone?

    I agree with AT mines behaving more like pressure sensitive mines.
    Good going SOE.
    Good going. :)
  2. Kahlev

    People will still cry, you realize how quick it is to throw a sticky grenade after two mines like a previous poster said?

    This changes nothing, get mineguard if you don't want your sundy to die to mines, period.

    Now if I could only get 3 c4, I'd pay 10,000 certs for the ability if I could.
  3. Naithe

    In which case the sunderer is being defended, and the game simply is changes to allow the defenders to react..

    Do mines need changes to work in their intended way Yes! Are mines supposed to be used as some sort of UBER C4? No!

    The entire reason C4 is fine in most ways, is because you can't simply do a suicide run, need only 1 second at the target, and then get killed but STILL destroy the vehicle.
  4. Vachek

    Blah blah blah they removed another easy kill for me blah blah blah so I'll call them names to prove my point.

    suffice for a tldr?
  5. Separatists

    whats the big issue? just throw a nade when youre done planting tank mines next to the sundy.
  6. Flying Mug

    This. Hopefully they stop running Mineguard cause they think they're safe.

    Best Sunderer kill is now dropping mines on the roof and detonating them with the Beamer.
  7. Shiaari

    Doesn't matter. Mines were not intended to be used like C4 applied explosives. Continued use of mines in that way will result in changes that prohibit their use in that way. SOE does not want you applying mines directly to a vehicle. That's why they gave you C4.

    Mines are ambush weapons. You place them in a spot where a vehicle is likely or will move over them. An example of a non-abusive and creative application of tank mines is placing them near proximity mines for extra explosive punch against MAXes and flak hardened personnel. Placing them directly on a vehicle, however, is abusive. That's what C4 is used for.
  8. TheRighteous

    So now instead of leaving my mines to detonate after I throw them, ill just shoot them. Really, this doesn't make much difference.
  9. blzbug

    Do you not see the glaring logical fallacy in this sentence?

    It is ok to be "creative" and use an anti-vehicle mine to blow up a light assault with flak armor, but it is "abusive" to use an anti-vehicle mine to blow up a vehicle???

    A deployed anti-tank mine detonates in the presence of a vehicle on top of them. If an AT mine is deployed underneath a vehicle, what logical reason is there for the mine to not trigger?

    I can see the arguments against a mine thrown on top of a vehicle.
    I can see the arguments that the mine should be "deployed" like a turret instead of tossed like a frisbee. Although SOE tried this and failed the first time.

    But deploying a mine under a vehicle and the mine refusing to trigger...it makes no sense.
    • Up x 1
  10. o.Solei.o

    As an engi, I say, this is as it should be. C-4 was kind of pointless, now it has a purpose.

    Also I would like to add, situational awareness doesn't reliably protect sunderers. All it takes is one desynced enemy to run right through the hail of bullets and detonate the sundy. I've had it happen to others I was shooting at, I've had it happen to myself, and you can be relatively certain it happened to a great many of the YouTube montagers that walk casually past enemy players without being seen or murdered in their videos.
  11. Shiaari

    Mines are not intended to be deployed on vehicles. They are to be placed in advance of a moving vehicle. Period. End of discussion.
  12. Armchair

    Except it's not.

    Mines CAN be planted in the ground and left dormant for ages until something runs across them. THEY ALSO can be used pro-actively as AT-weapons in a manner similar to satchel carges. This is a classic tactic that dates back to the great wars.

    Do you know WHY armor operates with infantry support? One of the reasons is so someone doesn't take-out a mutli-million dollar tank with an infinitely cheaper explosive left over from before the cold war. Be it an old AT-mine, a shaped charge, or an IED, they're all high-explosives and all EXTREME threats to armor if the enemy infantryman can reach point-blank range.
    • Up x 1
  13. Shiaari

    When a mine used that way it's not a mine... it's a satchel charge. Two completely different weapons. If you could modify a mine into a satchel charge in this game what would it be? Oh, right, C4. We have C4. Use C4 for what it was intended to be used for, and use mines like mines.

    Pretty simple.

    And you brought up IEDs... oh right... they're remotely detonated just like C4 in this game. Why not use C4 instead of mines? Oh, right, C4 is much more expensive.

    You're just too lazy to spend the cert points on all that C4. Let's be honest.
  14. Kudag

    IEDs are not a specific weapon. It's right in the goddamn name: Improvised Explosive Device(s). There is not a standard blueprint or specification. There is not a standard payload or trigger. The only thing they have in common is that they are home-made and they go boom. To say that all IEDs are remotely detonated is to make a ridiculous claim wholly separated from reality.
    • Up x 1
  15. Nintyuk

    When a proximity mine is placed down it calibrates it's self based on it's surroundings. If placed on or under a static vehicle it calibrates it's self thinking the hunk of metal above or near it is part of it's surroundings and it waits for something large enough that isn't giving off a friendly signal to detonate.

    SENSE, It does make it.
  16. blzbug

    Oh, I didn't realize you are part of the AT mine design team from Nanite Systems, a fictional arms maker from hundreds of years in the future :rolleyes:

    You could just as easily say that when the engy throws down the mine, he hits a button that turns on the mine's sensors after a 5 second delay.

    There are valid gameplay reasons to debate how AT mines *should* work in PS2. And valid reasoning based on physics as to why an upward exploding mine should fail when thrown on top of a vehicle. But arguments about how you think a mine is designed are silly. If the mind can think of it, hands can make it.
  17. Ryekir

    You can get 3 c4 for around 900 certs (if I remember the costs correctly): 200 for the first brick + 500 for the second brick + 200 for the first level of Utility Pouch.

    Incidentally, since I wanted to test it out, I bought the first level of Utility Pouch before buying c4 on my engineer and discovered that it does NOT give you access to c4 on it's own and you still have to buy the first level of c4 in order to use it.
  18. Nintyuk

    Damm He's on to me! Warm up the delorean marty I need to go back and stop my self from posting...

    ...Ohh wait sarcasm, False alarm.
  19. commandoFi

    This combined with the longer arm time makes tanks safer from aggressive engies, but not so much for AMSes, the thing most of the whining was about.
  20. Evil Monkey

    I believe SOE will be releasing "Satchel Charges" that do the same thing the old AT mine did. They will be 100 Inf resources and will insta-kill any Sunderer.

    Just 700 SC to unlock them! A bargain!

    However once everyone has bought it, it will be nerfed so you need three of them....
    • Up x 1