A Rough Proposal for the Functionality of Tank Mines

[CodeVertigo]

I saw the previous thread on Tank Mines (which, honestly, got rather messy), and got to thinking. As such, I've written up a short and very rough proposal for some adjustments that I hope will improve gameplay and address some of the issues that people have raised with respect to Tank Mines. Of course, constructive feedback is always welcome, but please be civil. Remember, we're all trying to find ways to improve the game, and shouting at each other won't help that end.

The first question we should ask is what problems the current functionality of tank mines causes, especially with respect to C4. To me, it seems that the potential problems are:

- Designwise, causes redundancy of C4 as an Engineer's tool - as far as I know, there are no situations in which an Engineer will choose C4 over Tank Mines. This is further worsened by the much higher cost of C4.
- On that note, the damage of each individual tank mine appears to allow one person to destroy a standard AMS-Sunderer on their own, which arguably should not be the case. See the C4 damage levels, where two blocks will allow a player to severely damage a Sunderer, but needs a teammate with at least a HA rocket to help finish the job.
- Tank Mines do not appear to adequately fulfil their intended purpose - that is, a passive, defensive explosive device that is laid in preparation for a vehicular attack in order to temporarily deny a point of entry.
- Because of the relatively low mine-count per player, using them as intended is potentially frustrating for both sides. On one hand, the players laying the mines often cannot cover a large enough area to properly deny a path unless they have a full squad. In choke points where they do, the conflict often results in stray explosions destroying many mines before the tanks actually reach there. On the other hand, those running over the mines will get frustrated due to deaths occurring with no chance to respond.

If we were to propose a solution, what do we need to keep in mind?

- Given the existence of C4 and the definition of mines, C4 should be more suited to the task of destroying stationary vehicles, such as deployed Sunderers than the Tank Mines
- That said, there is no reason why it shouldn't be *possible* for tank mines to be used in a way similar to how they are now (i.e. placed next to a Sunderer and detonated by being shot)
- If we were to increase the number of mines available to each player, how much do we need to reduce mine damage?
- Will increasing the number of mines available result in Minespam?
- Should adjustments should be made to the Mine Guard?
- If minefields become prevalent, should there be a method of detecting mines other than physically looking for them (e.g. a mine-radar)?

It's not an exhaustive list of considerations, but it's a start. Based on this, my tentative proposal is as follows:

- Tank Mines should take longer than C4 to place. I propose starting at 1.25-1.5 times the deployment time of C4, and adjusting from there.
- The number of Tank Mines available should be increased, starting at 4, with two additional cert levels that increase the maximum to 5 and 6 respectively.
- The damage of Tank Mines should be reduced. The damage of 4 Tank Mines should do the same amount of damage as 2 bricks of C4.
- Tank Mine explosions should not detonate other Tank Mines.
- However, Tank Mines should be vulnerable to other explosion sources such as tank rounds and HA rockets.

- I'm unsure about how Mine Guard should be adjusted, but I tentatively suggest making the highest rank reduce mine damage by 65%, and adjusting the lower ranks based on that.
- In addition, the introduction of an auditory Mine Detector should be considered. I suggest limiting this ability to Sunderers and Flashes. It would begin beeping if mines were detected within a certain range of the vehicle, increasing in frequency as the vehicle gets closer to the mines. Perhaps with three ranks, at 15/25/35m.

Summary:

The idea behind the proposed changes is to move the role of Tank Mines more towards the idea of how they are traditionally used, while also making them more viable for that purpose. They should still be able to destroy Sunderers as they are used now, but it will be much, much harder (though I'm sure someone will be on YouTube doing it anyway).

Retaining the vulnerability of Tank Mines to explosions should discourage their use immediately outside or in bases where they would be destroyed in a fight. That said, the increase in mines available would encourage their use in the outskirts of the base, and passes which bases do not reside in.

To balance this increase in quantity of mines, I have proposed a reduction in the damage dealt by the individual mines. This presents minelayers with a choice - do they pack their mines very tightly together, covering less area but with a more lethal explosion, or do they spread them out, covering more area, but less effectively?

These changes will likely mean an increase in the prevalence of minefields, and as such, the proposed Mine Detector should give armored columns a means of dealing with them by detecting them early. On top of this, it would give the Sunderer and Flash more utility in an armored column.

[Rumblepit]

i think they way they work now is fine. its breaking up armor columns , and those that like to pull a mbt and go solo well they have to think twice about that now, because if you have a gunner then there is no reason he cant shoot light assaults and engis as they come after you. thus its helping to cut down on the amount of armor on the field.

if you want to solo and sit still in a tank while trying to snipe from 300 ms away then you deserve to die everytime. all i can say is get and gunner, use coms, and watch all the engis and light assaults die who try to come after you.

hope this helps

[CodeVertigo]

Originally Posted by Rumblepit

i think they way they work now is fine. its breaking up armor columns , and those that like to pull a mbt and go solo well they have to think twice about that now, because if you have a gunner then there is no reason he cant shoot light assaults and engis as they come after you. thus its helping to cut down on the amount of armor on the field.

if you want to solo and sit still in a tank while trying to snipe from 300 ms away then you deserve to die everytime. all i can say is get and gunner, use coms, and watch all the engis and light assaults die who try to come after you.

hope this helps

If I've understood correctly, what you've mentioned is that the current use of Tank Mines means that tank pilots are more likely to need gunners to help them watch their backs. Because the tanks need more gunners, there are less people to drive other tanks, so the number of tanks around is reduced.

It's a valid argument I suppose, but arguably, the changes in the proposal still allow for this. The Engineers may no longer be able to walk up to a tank to throw down a bunch of mines, but that role can still be fulfilled by C4.

Thus in theory, the proposal I've suggested should still allow for this particular type of deterrent to tankspam, but also allow for the aforementioned changes in Tank Mine function.

[ShadetheDruid]

As a C4 user (not engie, but LA), i'll celebrate the day people have to work to destroy vehicles (like we do) rather than just suiciding with death frisbees. Plus, minefields would give a lot more tactical aspects to engie play.

We already have more than enough ways to destroy tanks, and the concept of having ridiculous stuff to counter spam (rather than fixing the actual causes of the spam) needs to die.

[CodeVertigo]

Originally Posted by ShadetheDruid

As a C4 user (not engie, but LA), i'll celebrate the day people have to work to destroy vehicles (like we do) rather than just suiciding with death frisbees. Plus, minefields would give a lot more tactical aspects to engie play.

My hopes for the Mine Detector are more focused on the Sunderer and AMS. I am hoping that it may increase the prevalence of Blockade Armor over Mine Guard, which should make AMS assassination a bit less trivial. My logic works something like this:

- Proposed changes should imply a reduction in the use of tank mines to kill deployed Sunderers
- Instead, mines are used to create minefields, and C4 is used to kill Sunderers
- This leads to teams that run Sunderers with Blockade Armor, led by Flashes with Mine Detectors
- The result is that teams that work together can benefit from being able to negotiate minefields and bring some defense against C4
- But those that pull Sunderers on their own will have to choose one or the other

It's not airtight by any means, but that's how I hope it would work.

[ShadetheDruid]

Originally Posted by CodeVertigo

- This leads to teams that run Sunderers with Blockade Armor, led by Flashes with Mine Detectors

This would be pretty cool. The Flash driver would have to be pretty alert though, one wrong move and.. boom!

[Rumblepit]

im a huge fan of c4 myself , but if there werent so many stupid people driving around in armor allone i wouldnt get as many kills. thats the truth.

if your in a tank and you allow someone to get that close to you you deserve to die, its that simple. you have what??? 3000 ,5000 health, and you can move at 60 kph..... stop camping, get a gunner,communicate, and dont be stupid and i promise youll kill any infantry that come near you.

[Rumblepit]

Originally Posted by CodeVertigo

My hopes for the Mine Detector are more focused on the Sunderer and AMS. I am hoping that it may increase the prevalence of Blockade Armor over Mine Guard, which should make AMS assassination a bit less trivial. My logic works something like this:

- Proposed changes should imply a reduction in the use of tank mines to kill deployed Sunderers
- Instead, mines are used to create minefields, and C4 is used to kill Sunderers
- This leads to teams that run Sunderers with Blockade Armor, led by Flashes with Mine Detectors
- The result is that teams that work together can benefit from being able to negotiate minefields and bring some defense against C4
- But those that pull Sunderers on their own will have to choose one or the other

It's not airtight by any means, but that's how I hope it would work.

then they would have to allow players to carry more c4. if you want them to be used to kill stationary armor every class should be able to carry 4 to 6 c4. but i think they got it right the first time. no gunner means your fodder for light assaults and engis.
and if this is about engis killing your suny then you should be defending it at all times. why would you allow a engi to walk up to a spawn point which could turn the tides of a battle uncontested?

[ShadetheDruid]

Personally i'm not so worried about tanks, that's the whole reason I got proximity radar (to catch people sneaking up on me with mines or C4). Since i'm a Lightning driver, I don't have the advantage of a gunner to watch my back anyway.

The thing with Sundies though is they're hell to defend. All the people clumped up around it means all the engie has to do is get in the middle of them and they win within like one second and a couple of clicks. As you probably know, it takes 10 times longer for a C4 user to do the same job, especially if they're doing the whole job themself (my favoured method being underslung grenades to finish the job).

[Rumblepit]

Originally Posted by ShadetheDruid

Personally i'm not so worried about tanks, that's the whole reason I got proximity radar (to catch people sneaking up on me with mines or C4). Since i'm a Lightning driver, I don't have the advantage of a gunner to watch my back anyway.

The thing with Sundies though is they're hell to defend. All the people clumped up around it means all the engie has to do is get in the middle of them and they win within like one second and a couple of clicks. As you probably know, it takes 10 times longer for a C4 user to do the same job, especially if they're doing the whole job themself (my favoured method being underslung grenades to finish the job).

not really , we pair up light assaults when we go sundy hunting. they die as fast or even faster with c4. and as a lighting driver you have more of a speed advantage .

[CodeVertigo]

Originally Posted by Rumblepit

then they would have to allow players to carry more c4. if you want them to be used to kill stationary armor every class should be able to carry 4 to 6 c4. but i think they got it right the first time. no gunner means your fodder for light assaults and engis.

Hmm, I'm not sure I properly understand. Could you elaborate on why players would need to be able to carry more C4?

[Rumblepit]

Originally Posted by CodeVertigo

Hmm, I'm not sure I properly understand. Could you elaborate on why players would need to be able to carry more C4?

1 engi can take out a most sundys, maxed mine guarded sundy needs 2 engis, 7 mines to take it out. now you want c4 to be the only thing that can take out stationary armor" sundys" then players need to be able to carry more c4. takes 3 to drop a sundy.players who have c4 certed should get 4 to 6.

i assume you would rather the just keep it the way they have it now though?
so if a sundy parked you want those using c4 to put 2 on the sundy then run back resupply and drop another on there?
i sure most would love this,,,, because you can just leave your sundy unguarded go get kills and not have to worry about it getting blown up. if your a dedicated sundy driver, first and foremost get minegaurd,then defend your sundy at all costs . this is your job as the sundy driver. when it gets blown up you failed your faction because of lack of defense .

[CodeVertigo]

Originally Posted by Rumblepit

1 engi can take out a most sundys, maxed mine guarded sundy needs 2 engis, 7 mines to take it out. now you want c4 to be the only thing that can take out stationary armor" sundys" then players need to be able to carry more c4. takes 3 to drop a sundy.players who have c4 certed should get 4 to 6.

i assume you would rather the just keep it the way they have it now though?
so if a sundy parked you want those using c4 to put 2 on the sundy then run back resupply and drop another on there?
i sure most would love this,,,, because you can just leave your sundy unguarded go get kills and not have to worry about it getting blown up. if your a dedicated sundy driver, first and foremost get minegaurd,then defend your sundy at all costs . this is your job as the sundy driver. when it gets blown up you failed your faction because of lack of defense .

I think I see what you mean.

However, I don't think the changes proposed will mean that people can just leave their Sunderers unguarded, because the C4 will still do a large amount of damage.

On their own against a stock Sunderer, two bricks of C4 will bring it down to critical, and if nothing is done about it, the Sunderer will eventually burn and explode.

Against a Sunderer with Blockade Armor, the C4 will still do a ton of damage, but won't bring it to that critical state. However, from that point, the Sunderer can still be easily killed by throwing another rocket or two at it.


Essentially, what this means is that The Blockade Armor doesn't make the C4 ineffective, it just acts as a saving grace that buys them a tiny bit more time to repair the Sunderer. They still have to defend it though, because like you said, all it takes is for two Light Assaults to get on it together, or coordinate with a HA with a Decimator for the Sunderer to go down just as quickly as if it didn't have the armor.

[Rumblepit]

Originally Posted by CodeVertigo

I think I see what you mean.

However, I don't think the changes proposed will mean that people can just leave their Sunderers unguarded, because the C4 will still do a large amount of damage.

On their own against a stock Sunderer, two bricks of C4 will bring it down to critical, and if nothing is done about it, the Sunderer will eventually burn and explode.

Against a Sunderer with Blockade Armor, the C4 will still do a ton of damage, but won't bring it to that critical state. However, from that point, the Sunderer can still be easily killed by throwing another rocket or two at it.


Essentially, what this means is that The Blockade Armor doesn't make the C4 ineffective, it just acts as a saving grace that buys them a tiny bit more time to repair the Sunderer. They still have to defend it though, because like you said, all it takes is for two Light Assaults to get on it together, or coordinate with a HA with a Decimator for the Sunderer to go down just as quickly as if it didn't have the armor.

i get what your saying.... i really do, but people have spent tones of certs setting up engis to do this ........ okkk engi is the only class that can take out a sundy very very fast. 3000 certs are needed to do this and do it well, because most know better and have mineguard now. you dont like how mines work in this manner. i get that, but my point was what if they chose the other route? they allow players to carry more c4 then everyone could insta gib a sundy except infils. thats what you would get.

so i was saying was implying that they made the right decision in only allow a engi who has spent 3000 certs to do this.

GET MINEGUARD!!!!!!! everyone who runs a sundy should have it maxed.and if 2 engis happen to get you,then die knowing they had to spend over 500 resources to do it. nine times out of ten 2 wont make it to the same sundy.

[ShadetheDruid]

Originally Posted by Rumblepit

GET MINEGUARD!!!!!!! everyone who runs a sundy should have it maxed.

Well, that's kind of a problem in itself, isn't it? The rest of the options in the Sundie defense slot get left by the wayside because of one class with one item type.