all mines are lame and should be taken out of the game

If it bugs you, get over it. Mines are dangerous. If you are a Harasser or Flash and you run into them, you go boom. And that's fair to me. I die so frequently to mines when I do a Flash run its crazy, especially on Hossin. But Im not going to sit here and complain like I didn't run into the mines and didn't know they were there. I'm supposed to run into them and I'm supposed to not know they were there, like the enemy wants. I'm supposed to die to them, not get a little injured. That goes for all vehicles and people.

You can use AI mines to lock down a position when you know you are about to get attacked. I was at TI Alloys and we had just taken down an Infiltrator on the roof, and I saw where they were spawning from. I sniped a guy and hit another, and they started bum rushing me, so I went back up onto the roof and placed a mine. I waited there for the guy to come up, and he did. He tripped the mine, took some damage so he didn't have full shield, so I switched to my Hunter QCX and blasted him. He got outplayed.

The mine didn't OHK him in that scenario, and he didn't even know it was there. And I'm fine with that. But removing the ability for it to OHK when it really should be able to OHK is dumb. We don't need to change them. Maybe being able to carry more of them would be nice, but we really don't need to change them. You just have to be careful to avoid them if at all possible.

"Get over it" and "just accept it if it happens" are no justifications for keeping the mechanics.

This is why the "change mines" side has a point and the "keep mines as they are" side does not. The change mines side can point to what the problem is and why, while the keep mines side has so far only offered anecdotes of their own run-ins with mines or "git gud" reactions. I have yet to see someone make a good case for keeping mines as they are. The thing is that you can still have those anecdotes but with more depth and less cheese behind the mine system. Unless ofcourse you can make hard your claim that OHK mines "should" be the way mines are beyond sstatingit after another anecdote?

And after all, just because someone likes it does not mean we have to keep it right? We need to make it fun and engaging for as many people as possible. "Suck it up", "git gud", "enjoy the pain" reactions are insulting and more often used by the users who want to keep a precious OP toy than people who are genuine.

There is no problem. Thats how mines work and thats how mines are supposed to work. You step on them, and the person who placed it hopes you and your team just got wiped. Next best thing is for you to be heavily injured. And even if the mine goes off and no one dies, at least you know where they are. Thats how mines are supposed to work.

You walk over them? You die. You drive over them? You die. Its not cheesy. Thats just war. You should die. You should die. You should die. Or at least get injured if you step on it. Whats the problem with that?

And here's how thinking you are right goes. You are right until convinced otherwise. But that goes both ways, because at least from my perspective, you haven't convinced me that mines are cheesy or overpowered or anything like that.

So I will continue to say that mines should stay the way they are. The OP didn't even have a problem with mines. He named it "all mines are lame and should be taken out of the game" because thats what someone who died to his mines said. The simple fact is, they should die to his mines, especially AT mines. You and I have both seen it! Vehicles are hard to kill and go on long streaks. There has to be ways for Infantry to effectively deal with those that don't spot it. We have C4. That is fine. All you have to do is flank a vehicle (as anything other than LA, who can just zoom straight towards them), throw some C4 on it, back up, and blow it.

Why do tank mines, which require someone to actually drive into them or be blown up while a vehicle is near them, need to be any different than what they are now? What is the problem with them stopping vehicles as they do now? Currently, it takes 3 mines to blow up a sunderer, 2 for tanks and the Harasser, and 1 for a Flash. Why is that so wrong?

Why do AI mines need to change? They usually require someone to step directly on them to kill. They require someone who isn't paying attention to fall for them. Why do they need to change? Why do they need the ability to OHK removed, when it isn't a guaranteed OHK? Why?

Not entirely true. There is Sweeper HUD. One could buff that implant to give it more range, but the core principal of mines is set, it is delivered well and to a degree realistic. What some here don't understand is that no one can wave a magic wand and all evil mines magically go away. You have to showcase some self-accountability to pay attention and you are fine. You don't pay attention, you can go on care-free, until the next loud BOOM snaps back to reality. It's the same in traffic. You pay attention to traffic lights, don't you? You don't just wander through the streets, minding your own business, thinking nothing evil can befall you. And once the accident happens? "Curses! These evil traffic lights lead me astray!" No one does this, so why the lack of self-accountability in PS2?

See? That is the exact dumb argument that is constantly thrown around. You cant say "its supposed to be this way so lets keep it" if its clearly bad game design.
Why is it "supposed" to work like that? Just because it does so now? Because in real life it sure as hell doesnt work like that. In real life minefields are at best slowing enemies down if the mines arent overwatched by the owners. Anti infantry mines are also designed to disable the enemy rather than kill, and anti vehicle mines are rarely big enough to outright destroy modern vehicles. More likely to disable parts and score mobility kills than actual catastrophic kills.

Your only justification is "it is like it is". That way you can justify anything. So how about this: we change it to something better so we can say "it was designed that way, and now its properly designed too".

Self-accountability is fine and aside from a sarcastic opening post no one has really claimed to outright remove mines. The thing is that the amount of skill and attention needed to perform the self-accountability is much much higher than the skill and attention the mine layer requires. Besides that the entire mechanic is cheap due to the minelayer just dumping his mines in a second and leaving in the hopes of a kill. Saying "you can sacrifice better more universal loadouts for a niche anti-mine loadout" is not a good solution. You cant say "suck up this bad mechanic if you want to have any variety in your loadout". That is in no way good for the game.

There is more self-accountability in mines that do not OHK since the minelayer now has more self-accountability in placing and being nearby when they go off as well, while the people walking over them have self-accountability after a detonation as well.

So how about we actually go for a good system that has quite literally only improvements to offer to every single point of "dont change mines", except for the point of "but its like this now"?

Well, I would agree to mines not going to OHK, but they are limited in the amount we can place. If not to OHK, but instead carve out all shield and 50% HP, how about we double the amount we can lay? It would mean that even IF you get struck by a mine, you are not forced to respawn and are warned about it. And infiltrators could lay 4 AI mines instead of 2 and engineers 6 instead of three and 10 AV mines instead of 5. They can create areas of denial that slow down the enemy or make them weak enough to become easier prey. The areas of denial get bigger and more enclosed, yet not so deadly that they OHK on first contact. Would THAT be a solution you would agree to more?

The thing with mines is it takes a second to drop them in place. You don't bury them into the ground as you would do in RL. That would take time. The thing with this is: The claymore sometimes doesn't drop the way I want it to. Careful, what you wish for... I would rather have it that AI mines can be placed on the ground or on walls in a specific way we want to. Just like we place modules in the construction system, where you can change the orientation of the module. THAT would make them truly a tool of the devil. Imagine a TR claymore plastered to the wall of a staircase, not placed right in the middle of it, where it stands out. Or an NC Bouncing Betty. If we put real time and effort into the placement of mines, we could come up with strategies that would make the people here foam with rage.

So, OK. Make mines only do 75% of their usual damage, but give us more of them. Make them placable like in the construction system instead of just dropping them and see what miracles we can do with them. If you rage now when I clumsily drop them to the ground, you will beat your monitor screaming in outrage when I masterfully place them in locations you never expected.

Yes I've repeatedly said that you would be able to carry more mines. I would have thought something on the lines of 6 mines for infils and 12 for engineers, 25 resources a piece. 75% damage may even be too high then, since they would be a considerable threat anywhere.

I think that both minelaying options need to be available, although you might just introduce more mine variety. If mines dont OHK and you have more of them there is a lot more reason to place mines of utility rather than killingpower. Some could be thrown halfway across a room and stick to walls, others could only be deployed like a Motion Spotter on the ground. Others can be thrown like current mines and then switched to deploying so you can carefully rotate them or place them on walls, ceilings, cover etc.

And think of the options! A literal bouncing betty which can be deployed on a wall, then fire a bomb into the room and detonate it when someone passes. Or a mine with spitfire AI which fires several shotgun shells in succession at passing enemies (not pump-action ones ofcourse), one that fires electricity which jumps to nearby enemies as well (doesnt make realistic sense but does make game logic sense), set players on fire, coat the ground with slippery substances that cause the player to slide on with limited control etc etc.

And all that variety and potential is only possible because the option to place cheesy and quick OHK mines

In a world where you can repair any vehicle with a specific tool or heal any player with a different specific tool indefinitely, these things need to be able to kill and destroy by themselves. Its not bad game design. These things are visible to you, but that only matters if you are paying attention. If you aren't paying attention to the mines in the game, you are going to die to them. If you ARE paying attention to the mines in real life, if that is even possible, you will most likely die to one because you'll never be able to know it is there. Its underground to hide it for that very reason.

So no. Its not clearly bad game design. It works as it should, not because this is how it has worked, but because this is how it has to work, especially when most classes don't have AV tools other than C4. The Engineer, the one placing the mines, doesn't have anything else to deal with a vehicle even if we decided to go with your idea of lowering the damage. It forces you to cert into an AV turret as well if you want to stop any vehicles, and thats stupid. If you want to watch your mines, go right ahead. I do that. But it shouldn't be forced upon you and then not rewarded.

Nope they dont. Just like you dont need a Carbine or AP gun to OHK: You, the player, needs to be there to finish the job and hit the target repeatedly.

The only reason they "need" to kill outright is if you use them as cheesy kill tools. Which means you just did the same circle logic as before. So once more: do you have any good reason beyond "its like this" to justify keeping OHK mines?

And even if you did somehow, somewhere find a reason... do you have any reason why it would be better than mines that dont OHK and request more skill and overwatch from the minelayer while still asking attention from their victims?

These three things are not alike. A Carbine or AP gun are both offensive tools, while mines are defensive. A Carbine doesn't need to OHK because it has multiple bullets in the mag, and in a game with health pools and TTKs like Planetside, having a Carbine OHK would be OP. It doesn't need to OHK.

An AP gun doesn't need to OHK either. Its a tank. It is mobile. It is not easily destroyed. However, it makes sense that it would, since the player is getting hit with a tank shell.

Mines are different. You place a mine down, they are immobile, you have a limited amount of them, and if it is spotted, it is easily destroyed. It requires the enemy to walk right onto it, and for vehicles, they have to hit multiple mines. And they cost nanites per mine, so every failed attempt is a nanite wasted. Thats why they should stay the way they are, because of how easy to deal with they are and how balanced and versatile they are. They aren't cheesy. Just don't fall for them. Let them continue to do high damage to vehicles.

If the mines don't OHK and you have to camp them, it makes for a less effective defense. Mines hold off an area from an unsuspecting target. Place them in a good spot that people will overlook or just not pay attention to, but will move through, with a goal in mind. Boom. Mine goes off, kills someone, they have to restart. And you can only do it once to them. Anyone you kill once with a mine will die only once to you via a mine, because they are going to be more conscious of them the next time. Its not like an OP weapon where it is unavoidable. This, this is avoidable.

Plus, I don't care about other minelayers and their skill. Say the meta changes so that you have to finish players off after they pass through the mines. Well, most players are just going to shoot the mine that they see, and with the meta change, they know the Engineer is close by, and everyone else who steps on one will just run back the way they came so they don't die to the Engineer. It creates a certain playstyle that is countered by not falling for its stupidity. We shouldn't be creating metas, or at least broadcasting these playstyles so they become one. This is one reason why its better to just leave things the way they are, since they aren't a problem. If you get annoyed dying to mines, you need to chill and play slower.

Careful, what you wish for. You just might get it. People complain about mines already, if you diversify the kinds of mines, you will bring more misery upon them.

But, to just humor you:
You want mines with all kinds of damage? Sure, why not? I can think of worse ways to create a cert-sink for the guy who already has everything.

- Classic HE

- Bouncer (One disc whirls up to the height of the head or chest and unleashes a volley of bullets in every direction)

- EMP (Boom go your shields)

- Tesla damage, jumping from unit to unit up to three units, taking out shields and hurt some

- Fire damage similar to one thumper detonation, maybe stronger

- Concussion effect - simply a concussion grenade crossed with a proximity trigger.

- Toxic Gas for 5 meters

- Flash - simply a flash grenade crossed with a proximity trigger.

- Jamming (Minimap gone)

- Warp vortex (weaponizing the energies collected by the containment facilities on Esamir. These mines deploy a temporary warp field killing everyone in it. Twists and turns...Crack!)

- CAT ( Short for catapult, placed outside, mostly harmful for everyone but LAs. This thing will shoot you into the sky. That alone is not the lethal part. But then, there is gravity. )

I have enough ideas in the darker corners of my mind to unleash pandemonium onto the enemy.

If you want to go through with making mines not OHK, you need to make them very, very hard to see when they are placed and let us stick them to walls. That way, we have options.

Yes exactly, they are passive, immobile things. And yet they can outright kill people. Pizza delivery in crowds is also a powerful offensive minelaying method as is using them behind enemy lines. "Defensive" is also no excuse, in fact its all the more reason not to make them OHK. if they are defensive you are around to make use of their effects. If you use them offensively (place and walk away) then your effort compared to the victims is microscopic for a kill. A quick look at the scores on Fisu suggests that mines score a hard kill between 30 to 40% of the time, compared to 20 to 30% for frag grenades. That is one cheap and effective tool and for less risk and effort than frag grenades. Even C4 has a lower kill ratio per use.

Again: mines are the most effective nanite-costing AI weapon and they cost less skill to use with less danger to the user.

They are badly designed. Far too effective for too little skill used and far safer to both place and get kills with than any other nanite object infantry might employ.

Also many of the "downsides" are inherent to keep current OHK mines balanced. Like their limited supply and how easily they are destroyed IF YOU ARE DUMB ENOUGH NOT TO BE AROUND WHEN IT IS SPOTTED.
On top of that I already offer the solutions to your non-arguments: cheaper mines, more mines per carry, more variety in the deployment and detonation of mines.

Any "problems" of having not as effective mines if they cant OHK is a L2P issue. You are so dependant on mines that OHK that you cant even think of the half dozen of uses and ways non-OHK mines could be used and still remain incredibly powerful.

So yeah, another swing and a miss for the OHK mines advocates.

Sure it is.

That thing that bugs others happens to be fun for some people. And THAT is justification for keeping it.

Don't get me wrong, it does bug me. It just doesn't bug me enough that I feel I can justify taking the fun from someone else. Probably biggest factor in this is the fact that the victim skill is still a consideration. When I die most times I could have avoided it. Annoying, yes. Fair? Also yes. So I say keep it.

No, a good system does not bug people, but creates a fun dynamic between both sides. Since it is not a fair dynamic between the mine layer and the victim its considered not that fun by most except when placing the mines themselves. And you act as if changing the mines completely removes any fun for the mine layer. Well unless all you want is cheap and easy OHK's that just isnt true. You get more mines and more ways to place and use them than you do now.

Mines are one of the most efficient uses of nanites for infantry, for less skill and less risk, and we can do better.

Why? They already hit 1 out of 2 detonations and get a solid center hit 1 out of 3 times or more. They are plenty stealthy if only you learn to place them like they were intended .

With the addition of more mines and the already proposed different mine variations and placement options there is really no point in making mines even less visible than they already are.

C4 is often used to destroy vehicles that don't have anyone in it. That is how MOST players play. That don't go and keep throwing them from ledges for group kills. Mines kill more because people unsuspectingly run over them. They are looking for players, not mines. They forget mines are their enemies, then they die to them. This goes for anyone using AI mines too.

Thats the point. Place mines and wait for a kill. Or wait for them to be destroyed. Its one or the other.

Real talk, you have this obsession with skill. Mines are balanced, but you complain about skill. "Oh no, people could die to this SKILLESS STRAT. No matter if they made a skilless play and died to it. The person who killed them was SKILLESS ALSO!" It really doesn't matter (in most scenarios you mention). It doesn't matter if players die to mines that were just dropped. And trust me, no one forgot about them. Thats why mines stay there - because the Engineer didn't place any more. They knew to not place more. They waited for you. They just didn't wait to mop you up if you didn't die. And if you are running Sweeper Hud, oof. It'll be a waste to go after anyone with that hard counter to it.

Yes, those balancing things are meant to balance the current version of the tool. Yes. Yes. But no, it doesn't matter if you are around when the mines are spotted, since you have no clue when they are spotted. Theres no one shouting out "enemy mines spotted", and even if there were, it doesn't matter, since the mines take like 2 or 3 bullets to explode. C'mon man, did you think that was a valid point? By time you are aware the mines are spotted (i.e you hear someone shooting at the ground), its too late to save your mines. And even if you did, its not like you can pick them back up again currently.

And if the mines are gonna be lower damage, they need to be more hidden so that people actually step on it.

Any "problems" of constantly dying to mines and viewing them as OP is a L2P issue. Listen man, I rarely use AI mines anymore, and when I do, I'm not relying on the OHK, because often times, they either get destroyed or don't OHK, so I have to finish them anyways. But removing the ability to have a mine that has the potential to OHK is dumb.

And no, I can think of ways that having more, less lethal mines will be useful and powerful. I just don't care. I am fine with the way things are and we don't need the devs going and screwing stuff up, even if I will adapt either way. Mines don't need a change. They are fine as is, and if you are a vehicle main and you are getting annoyed at dying to them, good. You are supposed to, since most of you are going on long streaks anyways, and if you are an infantry main that keeps dying to AI mines, check your corners. L2P.

So they get a kill 1 out of every 6 times. And you can place them as intended all you want. Create a new meta and people are going to adapt to it. Therefore, make them less visible so they hit more than 1/6 of the time.

Can you post a link to this information please.

Where does that come from, "with no one in it" and "that is how most players use it"? That is about as accurate as "my faction always get's double-teamed" or "my team is all veterans but we simply have the weakest weapons truly".

And if people unsuspectingly run over mines, that is the entire point right? That is what mines are for, but you are saying they should somehow be able to avoid their entire point despite that the metrics show mines to be pretty much the best AI nanite item there is.

Yeah again circular reasoning, "this is how it is so that is how it should be". This sentence does not even require the mines to OHK.

No I have this "obsession" with fair and balanced gameplay. Also you are the one who keeps pointing to "people just need the skill to see and avoid/destroy the mines inside". Sure you dont use the word "skill" but it comes down to the same thing. What I am suggesting is that the skill and effort in the minelayer is at least somewhat comparable to the skill and effort the victims need to put in to stay safe AND keep variety of loadouts a thing.

Reading on I believe there is no point to trying to argue beyond this point as it becomes really dumb victimshaming and ignoring any effort they might have put in and still die. You again just state "THEY ARE BALANCED" without any indication as to why.

Why dont you try it from the other end: why would mines that dont OHK be balanced? You named "the minelayer would need to put in some actual EFFORT, oh noes!" As reason.