Engineer Mine nerf????

[CraazyCanuck]

Got on this morning to check things out briefly, and in one engagement I was attempting to mine a base for an incoming TR armor convoy and when I went out to add my C4 bricks to the AV placements, the AV placements were gone with the enemy still at the next base and no one, friendly or enemy in sight and no explosions sounds to accompany their destruction if someone had triggered them.

So anyone else notice this? Did SOE nerf the engineer? If so I just wasted considerable certs specing out my mining tree. And no its not OP. Just making it easier for vehicles to have their way of things by limiting counters. The mines and usuage there of were paid heavily for both in certs and with resources. So I hope it was just a glitch.

Anyone else can confirm?

[Figment]

Anti-tank mines are OP.


Cert points expenses don't justify crap design and they don't cost any resources worth of note, stop kidding yourself because you like being OP against another poorly designed unit that's also OP in specific ways.

[Gatekeeper]

I'd agree that anti-tank mines seem overpowered currently, one-shotting a tank is really OTT.

2-3 mines killing a tank would be fine, so long as they can't be grouped too closely together - there should be some chance to brake or swerve after hitting the first mine and so avoid death. If that means allowing Engis to carry more mines to compensate, then that's fine by me.

[CraazyCanuck]

Not sure what mines you guys are using but bare minimum, takes two to kill an undamaged tank. 3 or more if they have mineguard.

So no they aren't OP. And work as intended. If 1 mine killed an undamaged prowler then I would agree.

[NewSith]

Anti-tank mines are UP... Nerf the mine guard!

See what I did there?

[Figment]

Yes they are OP craazycanuck.


If you think being able to throw MINES rapidly from a roof is not OP for an insta-kill just because you have to throw two (OMG THE EPIC WORK INVOLVED IN PLACING THEM), then you're utterly delusional.


They may as well not require two, because it doesn't actually matter right now if it's one or two: you get no warning, you can't do anything to stop it, you can't drive away and the death is instant.


They're horribly OP. In fact, C4 is. Trust me on that, I use it constantly. I actually had to work in PS1 to blow up a vehicle with mines or boomers and take my time and be careful about it.

In PS2? just get within close range spam two things, press button - oh wait that's C4. Get within spitting distance, click twice, kill a tank. THAT is the current mines. Utterly OP placement speed, power and proximity and utterly OP deployment methodology.



I must say you have really low standards. As in I can't see you having standards, at all. 1 is OP but 2 is not? That's simply being arbitrary, not having standards.



Working as intended? If this is intended, then the devs are even worse than you'd think from mere observation of poor implementations, which can be considered oversights and inexperience at present. If it's intended, they should just be sacked.


Oh and uhm, C4 cost more resources and tend to do less damage since nobody uses mineguards. C4 is IMO OP at present. Like pretty much everything else though.

[Gatekeeper]

Frankly I didn't even know how many mines it took to kill a tank, or how they were placed - since I've never used them. All I know is that, as a tank driver, you sometimes die instantly from full health to mines that you had no warning about. Which, as Figment says, is clearly overpowered.

[Calisai]

Personally, As a tank driver and an Engineer... I would rather have 3-9 mines to place and require 3 mines to kill a tank, then the 1-3 mines and near-instakill we have now.

It's real hard to setup a defensive perimeter and hope to stop any kind of advance with 1 or 2 mines. Oh, and being able to throw a mine off a tower and have it work is a little OP. Mines are meant to be placed prior to battle and lie in wait. Not be a poor-mans C4.


I miss the PS1 days of being able to setup an actual mine field, even though a good tank driver could stop if his reactions were good enough... it still killed a lot of vehicles moving at full speed. (Of course, I would also need to be able to see my mines on the map then... this having to remember where all the mines are, and not know whether they are still up or not is annoying)

[Chaff]

.
I agree that C4 & Tank mines are OP. I primarily play Engie over any other role, so I should be motivated to vote "for" them. In no circumstance should an Engie be able to "throw" or drop a mine for any insta kill. Put a 30 second timer on a mine throw/drop.

Cheap kills will be exploited if they're left there in the game. Cheap kills suck. PS2 needs to be quicker to correct these sorts of mistakes/oversights.

This is a case where PS1 mechanics were better (IMO). I also think an Engie should have the ability to lay far more mines, but it should take at least 3-4 mines to kill a healthy MBT. I liked it better that way in PS1.
A Sundy should require 1 or 2 more mines than a MBT to kill. 1 mine should kill a Flash (unless it has the mine sweeper cert & is driving at min speed). 2 Mines for a Lightning kill.

They could make a better emersion with the whole mine thing. It takes a few Engines 5 minutes to mine an entire bridge. It should take an equal effort in time to un-mine a bridge. AT least a full clip or two from your rifle to defeat a single mine.

Add a feature only the Flash gets. The Flash would have to drive at its lowest speed & make two passes ea direction to safely detonate/eliminate a heavily mined bridge.

When you're out laying a mine field - you are exposed to risk. Forcing a Flash to putt up and back a few times returns the favor. It also helps give purpose to those oddballs that may like a vehicle like the Flash. Give it more purpose than just transport a Sniper/INF somehwere out in BFE. Also, allowing a good old gun & foot soldier to shoot them is a nice balance. If we had AP rounds - those would kill a mine quicker than standard rounds. To un-mine a whole bridge full of mines should require one soldier to reload his ammo....in order to do it himself at significant risk (potential) and a significant time loss.

This way, the original Engies that laid out the giant mine field get the benefit of delaying the enemy - even if no vehicles of sofites were harmed.

The deeper the roles - the deeper the emersion. The better balance, measures, and counter measures the better the gameplay is. This game is in early Beta, and needs a lot of improving & tweaking.
.

[Bloodlet]

Mines are not OP. Get mineguard and learn to play.

Edit: I think it's funny how people can complain about mines "one" shotting their tank when their tank can also actually one shot that engineer assuming the tanker has situational awareness.

[Merzun]

I liked the mine mechanics in PS1 but in using a similar approach for PS2 mined would have to be much much cheaper. As an almost pure infantry player of multiple classes I am already run dry in ressources as it is now. Also one has to question if anyone would bother certing mineguard when you simply can take multiple hits or just come to a stop and repair up or if mineguard would simply become an useless cert.

In my opinion this is a two edged sword. I really like the possibility of having laid out minefields and shutting of attack paths. On the other hand everything in this game is very deadly and so should be mines otherwise they would be underpowered.

[ShadetheDruid]

The problem with tank mines is PS2 doesn't have tank mines, it has death frisbees.

[Figment]

Merzun: everything else kills too fast. Making more things kill too fast only adds to the problem, it doesn't solve it or make it balanced.

[JesNC]

Personally, As a tank driver and an Engineer... I would rather have 3-9 mines to place and require 3 mines to kill a tank, then the 1-3 mines and near-instakill we have now.

It's real hard to setup a defensive perimeter and hope to stop any kind of advance with 1 or 2 mines. Oh, and being able to throw a mine off a tower and have it work is a little OP. Mines are meant to be placed prior to battle and lie in wait. Not be a poor-mans C4.


I miss the PS1 days of being able to setup an actual mine field, even though a good tank driver could stop if his reactions were good enough... it still killed a lot of vehicles moving at full speed. (Of course, I would also need to be able to see my mines on the map then... this having to remember where all the mines are, and not know whether they are still up or not is annoying)

This exactly! And we should continue to bring this up until they rework the Engineer class and CE.

But until then, I'll continue to use my two death frisbees to punish unattentive drivers.

[Merzun]

Merzun: everything else kills too fast. Making more things kill too fast only adds to the problem, it doesn't solve it or make it balanced.

Well i agree that there is a very fast ttk and I have also the opinion if one thing is OP nerf it instead of buffing the other things so that everything is Op and everyone dies faster. But were not talking that mines should get buffed here. They are like this since beta. If you nerf them you also have to nerf everything else from infantry vs infantry to infantry vs vehicles.

As it is now i get oneshotted by vehicles. If I want to avoid it i have to cert flak armor with taking the risk of getting killed by infatry faster. Same with vehicles and mineguard. Don't want to die to mines cert mineguard with risk of getting killed faster by other weapons. Making mines/c4 less powerfull is unfair if I still can get oneshotted by vehicles. I take a risk to get to the vehicle to lay them down so I should get rewarded. As said if you nerf that you also have to balance everything else including mineguard. Just imagine if it takes 4 hits to kill a tank without mineguard. With fully certed mineguard as it is now you have 70% resist and it would take (if I calculated corretly) 13+ mines. How many is an engineer suppossed to carry? Can one engineer even kill one vehicle or am i only a deterrent (we all know how well this went with aircraft)? Can the vehicle pretty much avoid a kill by simply stop? All this has to be taken into account to not malke the engi class worthless.

[ChipMHazard]

The problem with tank mines is PS2 doesn't have tank mines, it has death frisbees.

Heh, indeed. Personally I would like them better if we had to deploy them just like you would with the ammo pack via the ACE, just not quite as picky as to where it can be placed. So in essence you would have to place mines and no longer be able to toss them.
When we first got to try out mines I was really hoping to see entire minefields, but alas 'twas not to be.

[Bocheezu]

I thought mines could be seen with IRNV/thermovision? So there is a counter to them. If you are rolling a tank into an area where the enemy just left, you have to expect mines. That said, I think mines should have a deployment radius like PS1 so that you can't just stack them on top of each other and one-shot a tank.

[maradine]

I don't think mines should be de-powered in any way. I do think they should be "set", and not just tossed around like party favors, however. That setting should take a moment or two.

C4 is annoying, but I'm prepared to live with it.

[CraazyCanuck]

.
*snip*

I lost my post due to time restraints and posting, Doesn't keep me logged in currently where I am. Hamma you need to allow for a post to be automatically posted in once a person relogs without lost of their text. But back on topic. I'm not familiar with PS1 but what I had brought up in the lost post runs parallel with what Chaff has stated. I think he's spot on or the PS1 system was/is dramatically better then the generalized one used now in PS2.

Figment, this has nothing to do with my standards and your being a bit presumptious assuming you know mine. OP was not about mines/c4 being op Its about the possibility of a fundamental change to the utility of those engineers that have invested considerable certs into mines/explosives.

Its not the fact that mines/c4 destructive capability are overpowered. They're explosives for shit sakes. Compare mines to the destructive capability of rockets. They should be more powerful then the rocket but its as Chaff stated, and I think what Figment is also trying to get across. Poor implementation of explosives in this game. They've dumbed them down and generalized their usuage to the point they are an improved grenade. A deployment/arming timer is definitely needed in this game. whole explosive system needs an overhaul really. As its stands right now, it's clumsy. A counter similar to the one used for overloading/stabilizing generators would improve things.

Specialization in explosives with more detailed tree to both use or counter would be huge improvement. As the user increases their proficiency, the time need to deploy them would decrease as well as the ability to carry more. Engineers would also have their explosive versatility improved. The utility belt needs an overhaul as well. Should allow more of the same type to be carried, or 1 or more of a different type to also be carried, the exact number dependent upon rank if the current restraints on capacity are kept.

Minesweeper tree for the flash or this new buggee they've talked about would fill anti-mine role nicely.

[Figment]

Press F5 (refresh) when a post seems lost, often works.


You actually stated what your standards for OP were:

1 = OP
2 = Not OP

When asked, you also had no qualms with the other specifications either, while justifying it with a cost (cert cost is a one time purchase after an arbitrary grind and therefore never a justification of consistent power after purchase). That's what I based my statements on.

And explosives or not... "THEY'RE FUTURE TANKS FOR SHIT SAKE". Category has nothing to do with why an OP balance is justified. For the same category we have "future infantry suits" and other things. Balance is how it plays out in practice and what gameplay is gained from it. The category is hardly interesting beyond rock-paper-scissors (counters, etc).

[CraazyCanuck]

Thanks for the tip Figment, but no unfortunately it doesn't work for me.

The dmg of AV mine is not OP and requiring 2 or more mines to take out a vehicle seems right when combined with the cert and resources involved. The system they have in place on its usuage is the problem. I do not like the fact explosives can just be thrown out there and would be happy if they revised the system with a timer.

And I don't agree with cert not being a justifiable cost to consider for long term power. Time invested for certs should in turn translate to improvement in power. Any player can spend resources and hop into their faction's tank with no certs required whatsoever. (Another problem imo) That tank has power over infantry for only the cost of resources. 200 for the lightning and 250 for the heavier tank of your faction. 2 av mines 150 resources, while c4 is 200. I think those resources combined with the cert cost and the risk in their deployment is justifiable for having the ability to kill 1 vehicle. While the risk to your survivability is not always there when just placing the mines indirectly, you still risk your resources.

If that tank driver spends certs for mineguard he's improved his survivability, and I now have to spend certs to get up to 3 mines in order to ensure I take him out. Uping my resource cost to 225 and another 200 certs. I don't know how many av mines it takes in relation to the improved ranks of mineguard. Perhaps a more experienced engineer can answer that, but I am curious how it works out.

[Figment]

Time invested last year in chess doesn't gain me extra chess pieces this year. That's an entitlement reasoning, not a gameplay reasoning. It's irrelevant.


Time invested gains you personal experience (not even relating this to experience/cert points and battle ranks, mind, simply actual gaming experience).

[LoliLoveFart]

Tank mines damage is fine, the ability to run up to an enemy vehicle click twice and run away before it dies is OP.

Mines should be pre emptive not a "Oh there is an enemy sundy i am going to rambo off this tower and neuter their attack". As it stands you can drop 2 mines on a sunderer before you can be killed and that is a bit much.

If tank mines required a vehicle to move over the top of them instead of a proximity detonation suicide bombing sundies would not happen, well you could drop them and shoot them but that will kill you and takes a lot longer.

[DirtyBird]

Thankfully they have an option via certs that you can take to help with the mines, its not as if there is nothing you can do.

[Rothnang]

It takes 2 mines to kill any tank right now, the only thing about them is that you can place two mines on top of each other, so basically you still get instant-kills from mines.

[CraazyCanuck]

Time invested last year in chess doesn't gain me extra chess pieces this year. That's an entitlement reasoning, not a gameplay reasoning. It's irrelevant.


Time invested gains you personal experience (not even relating this to experience/cert points and battle ranks, mind, simply actual gaming experience).

I don't see how. Certs and resources are an integral part of the gameplay so how are they irrelevant. Time invested in this game, regardless of how bad a player may be still rewards certs. I fail to see your point.

[Emperor Newt]

For one I think they are too powerfull, making mineguard almost a must have as the amount of engis with mines increases each day. Luckily most of those are placed predictably on the road. But sometimes they aren't and I expect more enigs to learn that.

But the problems with mines are several:

- Single mines are pretty strong, but using mineguard almost negates minefields. There is a mismatch in balance between the two. All our dedicated tank drivers use mineguard and mines are no longer an issue for them. We actually use mineguard Magrinders to clear minefields on purpose (if there is no Zerg to... take care of this)
(Actually it's the same as I would say that there is nothing beter for infantry then flak armor but that's another topic)
- Mines should not explode when the target does not move (deployed sunderers)
- Mines as well as C4, proxinimity mines (etc) should be spottable. Although this would require some work to not make a single press of Q light up the whole minefield (how about having a cooldown on Q already. Just like BF?)
- There should be a away to defuse mines and c4 withot having to shoot them (making them explode and damaging the target)

[CraazyCanuck]

It takes 2 mines to kill any tank right now, the only thing about them is that you can place two mines on top of each other, so basically you still get instant-kills from mines.

Not entirely true from my experience in regards to the number of mines required. I've placed two mines under a tank and it yet survived. Only reason I can think of that makes sense is mineguard. Reason I've been drop 3 just to be sure.

[Figment]

I don't see how. Certs and resources are an integral part of the gameplay so how are they irrelevant. Time invested in this game, regardless of how bad a player may be still rewards certs. I fail to see your point.

Certs and resources are not the issue I'm talking about.


I'm saying your entitlement argument ("I should be more powerful now") related to them is entirely irrelevant.


No, you should not be more powerful.


You should be more versatile and adaptable to various gameplay scenarios.




If you spend 3 certpoints on a MBT in PS1 or 3 on engineer, neither is a measure of direct power. They're a measure of unit quantity incentive and character variation limitations as part of a trade-off. Cheaper == more appealing to get a number of cheap stuff, instead of a couple more expensive stuff. This way, not everyone uses the same setup.

Power has very little to do with it, at least stand alone. Of course it's one of the factors involved, but hardly THE factor. Frequent usability and versatility and combi-consequences are much bigger factors.



You can't say A costs Y certs, and B costs 2Y, so A must be half the strength of B. That's not how things work. It may be that gameplay is encouraged where there's more A than B, even though they are of equal power one on one, but B could have a bigger negative effect in high numbers.


The current cert system is flawed, in that you don't make a trade-off, you simply upgrade something you have anyway. How powerful it is, is not the only relevant variable, others are what it is used against, would it be abused in high numbers, and in what quantities can you use them, how flexible is it, what kind of other advantages (mobility, endurance, teamwork, etc) does it have?

These costs do not - or should not - be representing equal amounts of power per unit cost. They should be applied such that there's a balanced gameplay effect where you have sufficient quantities of all the unittypes needed in rock-paper-scissors, witout making certain units feel useless, or putting too much focus on one type of gameplay because it's cheap and flexible and therefore powerful in a different way than just direct firepower.


The amount of time invested in getting such an object in PS2 in particular, is simply a measure of how long they want you to play their game to get the carrot you want, incentizing you to use station cash instead to skip the grind on certain things.

However, they have chosen not to restrict the cert system, so really, in time, what won't you have? Can you then still say it should be more powerful? Because then everyone else can claim that too. You just happened to unlock this first. That's your choice. It doesn't mean you should get very powerful tools in return however. Just something that's useful.

[Figment]

@EmperorNewt: boomers and mines in PS1 didn't light up with Q, yet they were easy to spot. Why? They stood out.

[Crator]

@EmperorNewt: boomers and mines in PS1 didn't light up with Q, yet they were easy to spot. Why? They stood out.

As long as you weren't going too fast. The render distance of them will get you dead if you don't notice them in time enough to slow down before hitting too many (in a mine field of course and depending on vehicle type).

[ColdCheese]

Just a curious question, dont mean to thread jack. But do mines remain even after the person laying them dies or leaves the game?

BTW I agree with nerfing Frisbee mines and making them like ammo packs, c4 on the other hand is just perfect the way it is.

[DirtyBird]

Dies, yes.
Leave the game, doubt it. But you can check easily enough.

[Whiteagle]

.
I agree that C4 & Tank mines are OP. I primarily play Engie over any other role, so I should be motivated to vote "for" them. In no circumstance should an Engie be able to "throw" or drop a mine for any insta kill. Put a 30 second timer on a mine throw/drop.

Cheap kills will be exploited if they're left there in the game. Cheap kills suck. PS2 needs to be quicker to correct these sorts of mistakes/oversights.

This is a case where PS1 mechanics were better (IMO). I also think an Engie should have the ability to lay far more mines, but it should take at least 3-4 mines to kill a healthy MBT. I liked it better that way in PS1.
A Sundy should require 1 or 2 more mines than a MBT to kill. 1 mine should kill a Flash (unless it has the mine sweeper cert & is driving at min speed). 2 Mines for a Lightning kill.

They could make a better emersion with the whole mine thing. It takes a few Engines 5 minutes to mine an entire bridge. It should take an equal effort in time to un-mine a bridge. AT least a full clip or two from your rifle to defeat a single mine.

Add a feature only the Flash gets. The Flash would have to drive at its lowest speed & make two passes ea direction to safely detonate/eliminate a heavily mined bridge.

When you're out laying a mine field - you are exposed to risk. Forcing a Flash to putt up and back a few times returns the favor. It also helps give purpose to those oddballs that may like a vehicle like the Flash. Give it more purpose than just transport a Sniper/INF somehwere out in BFE. Also, allowing a good old gun & foot soldier to shoot them is a nice balance. If we had AP rounds - those would kill a mine quicker than standard rounds. To un-mine a whole bridge full of mines should require one soldier to reload his ammo....in order to do it himself at significant risk (potential) and a significant time loss.

This way, the original Engies that laid out the giant mine field get the benefit of delaying the enemy - even if no vehicles of sofites were harmed.

The deeper the roles - the deeper the emersion. The better balance, measures, and counter measures the better the gameplay is. This game is in early Beta, and needs a lot of improving & tweaking.
.
While I don't share your opinion that C4 and Tank Mines are overpowered, I do agree that Tank mines should:


Do less damage
Cost less
Be able to be carried in far greater numbers
Require a small amount of time to pass before they become active


Tank mines damage is fine, the ability to run up to an enemy vehicle click twice and run away before it dies is OP.

Mines should be pre emptive not a "Oh there is an enemy sundy i am going to rambo off this tower and neuter their attack". As it stands you can drop 2 mines on a sunderer before you can be killed and that is a bit much.

If tank mines required a vehicle to move over the top of them instead of a proximity detonation suicide bombing sundies would not happen, well you could drop them and shoot them but that will kill you and takes a lot longer.
Yeah this is probably where most of the drama comes from...

I mean, they've never let us actually lay mine FIELDS, just TWO proximity explosives that gravely injure a tank.
Since you ONLY get TWO, you pretty much have to set them right on TOP of whatever it is you want to damage, and they then have to DO ENOUGH DAMAGE to make that worth while.
It's circular logic!

Be glad if you aren't TR at least, then you aren't saddled with CLAYNONES as well...

Dies, yes.
Leave the game, doubt it. But you can check easily enough.
No, I believe they've fixed it so that they'll disappear a set amount of time after you stop being an Engineer, ether through changing class or logging out...

[Sunrock]

Got on this morning to check things out briefly, and in one engagement I was attempting to mine a base for an incoming TR armor convoy and when I went out to add my C4 bricks to the AV placements, the AV placements were gone with the enemy still at the next base and no one, friendly or enemy in sight and no explosions sounds to accompany their destruction if someone had triggered them.

So anyone else notice this? Did SOE nerf the engineer? If so I just wasted considerable certs specing out my mining tree. And no its not OP. Just making it easier for vehicles to have their way of things by limiting counters. The mines and usuage there of were paid heavily for both in certs and with resources. So I hope it was just a glitch.

Anyone else can confirm?

No they are not nerfed... most have been some bug going on for you.

Anti-tank mines are OP.


Cert points expenses don't justify crap design and they don't cost any resources worth of note, stop kidding yourself because you like being OP against another poorly designed unit that's also OP in specific ways.

Well you think every thing that has less then 30 min TTK is OP.

PS: How many here would cert into mine guard if a tank mine could not 1 shot tanks?

[Emperor Newt]

@EmperorNewt: boomers and mines in PS1 didn't light up with Q, yet they were easy to spot. Why? They stood out.
That's of course another solution. But does anyone think that this is actually going to happen with C4 and mines?

[Figment]

Well you think every thing that has less then 30 min TTK is OP.

PS: How many here would cert into mine guard if a tank mine could not 1 shot tanks?

Aren't you cute?

1. 30-50% increase on the lower half of infantry weapons only. More the shorter they are. Often simply reduced rate of fire.
Oh wow "30 minutes". :rolleyes: we would still be talking ttks of about that on a heavy assault.

Don't be a strawman jerk as the lot of you on ttk discussion. That would be like me saying you only want one shot kills. Don't be a ridiculous fool by being an insulting deliberately misinterpreting brat.

2. More people, since minefields would be far more common. Currently the guarantee is you will be spammed from a distance. Most people therefore use frontal armour or other directional armour.

More, larger minefields would make them a more consistent and omnipresent and harder to evade threat, thus the units leading a charge would be more likely to be given the job of minesweeper.

[Whiteagle]

2. More people, since minefields would be far more common. Currently the guarantee is you will be spammed from a distance. Most people therefore use frontal armour or other directional armour.

More, larger minefields would make them a more consistent and omnipresent and harder to evade threat, thus the units leading a charge would be more likely to be given the job of minesweeper.
This is probably the biggest issue, one that it'd be nice to get some Developer input on.

The individual mines are really powerful so we only get a few of them, but since we only get a few of them they need to be really powerful...

I can't really remember the Combat Engineering debates from Beta, but was it ever mentioned that there would be issues with having a lot of mines set up in one place?

[Figment]

I presume - like backpacks being missing - render issues are the core problem for devs. But to me that seems easy to settle: only render them within spitting distance!

[Whiteagle]

I presume - like backpacks being missing - render issues are the core problem for devs. But to me that seems easy to settle: only render them within spitting distance!
Well that's the thing, they already DO...

...So yeah, are there any more potential issues arising from having fields of mines instead of two crippling ones?

[Mietz]

Right now engi mines are totally faceroll.

The problem is the mechanic of mine placement and damage, which makes them being used as offensive tools:

1. Too much damage from one mine
2. Can be "dropped" on the ground instantly
3. Activates in the time a driver has time to notice that hes being offensively mined

1. If we distributed the damage across more mines, like lets say 5-6 by default (lvl1 cert) nobody would use them for suicide runs to clear out sunderers.
2. Mines should not be able to be dropped from a ledge on a vehicle and explode with the same damage as being placed on the ground. It makes no sense and is massively imbalanced.
3. Mines should need manual activation/arming when placed. Put down mine, hold down "E" for 1 second to arm. Mines are not grenades.

Mines are almost never used for stationary defense because you can't apply them for the use they -should- be used for: area denial.

AV/AI Mines should be a default utility for Engis with cert upgrades to make them better (for example not being able to be detonated by small arms fire or explosives, etc.)

[Dreamcast]

I did threads in Planetside 2 complaining about insta kill mines.


Nobody listened.


Eventually I turn to the dark side and started using them....Is super easy to kill sundys like this.


But seeing how this game is an instakill game, Mines insta killing sundys isn't a huge problem to me anymore.


I say the way to fix this is to make mines gain damage over time when deployed so lets say cap damage in 1000 dmg.....When you deploy it, is 500 dmg......so you can just go and drop them under vehicle and do max damage to them.

[ShadetheDruid]

Don't forget "4. Reduce the resistance from mineguard to bring it in line with the new mine stats". Should really go without saying, but someone's bound to flip their shit if you don't.

[KodanBlack]

I'd agree that anti-tank mines seem overpowered currently, one-shotting a tank is really OTT.

2-3 mines killing a tank would be fine, so long as they can't be grouped too closely together - there should be some chance to brake or swerve after hitting the first mine and so avoid death. If that means allowing Engis to carry more mines to compensate, then that's fine by me.

Now, I play Engineer, and I REALLY like the idea of giving a decrease in single mine damage, while giving an increase in the number carried. It would do two things, allow a vehicle driver to stop, or alter course, and allow for an engineer to place a small mine field at a key location to force the enemy to react to your strategy.

That would make for a much better game, in my opinion. Strategy and tactics would be increased in employing this idea. On both sides.

And, for any other engineers who don't like this idea, I leave you with this. Any vehicle operator who chose to ignore the first hit would still certainly die pressing the advance. Also, an engineer could begin to control the flow of a battle through the use of fortification style defences, which is at the core of combat engineering. Causing a line of tanks to stop or alter course to deal with your mine field would be epic.

[Mietz]

Don't forget "4. Reduce the resistance from mineguard to bring it in line with the new mine stats". Should really go without saying, but someone's bound to flip their shit if you don't.

Well yeah, obviously.

[Whiteagle]

Mines are almost never used for stationary defense because you can't apply them for the use they -should- be used for: area denial.
Indeed.
I've only rarely found them effective, and only in a place I KNEW they'd pull a vehicle up to...

...Even then, I only get a kill on a Flash or an assist on a Sunderer...

Now, I play Engineer, and I REALLY like the idea of giving a decrease in single mine damage, while giving an increase in the number carried. It would do two things, allow a vehicle driver to stop, or alter course, and allow for an engineer to place a small mine field at a key location to force the enemy to react to your strategy.

That would make for a much better game, in my opinion. Strategy and tactics would be increased in employing this idea. On both sides.

And, for any other engineers who don't like this idea, I leave you with this. Any vehicle operator who chose to ignore the first hit would still certainly die pressing the advance. Also, an engineer could begin to control the flow of a battle through the use of fortification style defences, which is at the core of combat engineering. Causing a line of tanks to stop or alter course to deal with your mine field would be epic.
Dude, I don't think ANYONE disagree with this...

...Which is why I find it so puzzling that they did it the way it is currently.

[Neutral Calypso]

Yes, give me more mines so I can lay them on the road from NC's warp gate in Indar! :D

I was just sitting in TR warp gate when DING: "Lightning Kill" after having forgotten I had laid the mines.