Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Nomad.M.Tac

Making Mines More Effective?

Recommended Posts

well this might be just me but from my experiences i have never felt mines and IEDs of their sort have been effective in PR as they would IRL. Mines and IEDs serve the purpose of area denial but this is hardly achievable in PR. there have been many times when i was an insurgent sapper waiting somewhere to trigger my mines for 15 minutes just to be killed while breaking cover for a second wondering why nothing ever comes my way.

 

An idea i have that might make mines more viable as an area denial would be to give commanders the power to set mine fields. this would be an ability available only for insurgent commander. the insurgent commander would get a cool-down ability(30 mins?) which would allow him to lay down an IED field of specific kind (AP or AT) with a medium spacing between each and a set amount of IEDs. this would make area denial for insurgents a more viable tactic allowing easier ambush. in Addition it would relieve insurgent sappers from trying to lay mines every where just to be shot leaving 5 mines which would be never activated due to kit loss.

 

and here comes the balancing part. The BLUFOR commander would get instead a cool-down ability (15~20 mins) which would basically detect mines at a certain radius. this ability would mark only mines which were in the radius and it would take around 2~5 mins to receive (mark) the intel. this might lead to the introduction of minesweeper role, making the breacher more viable (giving him a minesweeper as kit customization?), and/or making the engineer a more viable role and possibly a necessity for armor crews.

 

this would also make gameplay a lot more tactical on both sides making insurgents consider ambush routes, and BLUFOR consider possible ambushes a more tactical approach to caches and a lot more communication on both sides with command making him more useful.

 

i know there is a lot more balancing i haven't discussed but if i sat here to write them all i would miss my launch :P

so i want to know what you guys think and what possible balancing should be applied. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mines are effective. When a vehicle hits them they get either disabled or destroyed. That's how they work. Mines are meant to be set up as a field but you can't do this in PR as you can only have one engineer per squad. The best you can do is block a road. As insurgent, that's just part of the game both in real life and in-game. It's a waiting game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's more fun and more realistic that you have to go and place a minefield there yourself. If a commander can put it wherever he pleases, what would deter him from putting just outside the enemy base?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's more fun and more realistic that you have to go and place a minefield there yourself. If a commander can put it wherever he pleases, what would deter him from putting just outside the enemy base?

well there comes balancing because there is no way would just allow that to happen. i do agree its more fun to go and place them but it's hard to dedicate a player or two to just go around placing a minefield. i would suggest maybe that the commander could designate the area and an engineer could go there and place it at a faster rate so he won't have to stay there for 20 minutes placing mines, or he would set only a small amount. that would encourage teamwork with commander and would actually reward you for being an engineer making it a possibly more viable role

 

Mines are effective. When a vehicle hits them they get either disabled or destroyed. That's how they work. Mines are meant to be set up as a field but you can't do this in PR as you can only have one engineer per squad. The best you can do is block a road. As insurgent, that's just part of the game both in real life and in-game. It's a waiting game.

 

and that's why i am suggesting the ability to setup a mine field because we couldn't. its true that its a waiting game, however they also know that not every mine gets a kill but it definitely slows the enemy which could be a viable tactic when they try to defend a new cache. and i don't see a reason why should an engineer stay at 1 in squad when we are probably getting 128? not to mention even that kit is barely used when it has such a small availability this could make engineers more useful 

Although I would love to see minefields properly implemented(I actually suggested it long ago in PR), I do not like any form of "Hand of God" abilities.

it's understandable however you could read the suggestion i had at the beginning of this reply. then it would be less hand of god. and either way it seems more realistic since commanders have access to intel if they were for example trying to search for mines or find contacts who could place those mines for them for a few bucks (insurgents). you could possibly add the limitation that no certain amount of opposing force is in a certain radius.. all i am saying is its not really far fetched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a strange way I kind of hope IEDs become something truly frightening in this game and a great concern for BluFor teams. On all the patrols I went on, IEDs genuinely scared the living hell out of me. The sound/feeling when one of those goes off behind you is something I will never forget. 

 

If the team is able to achieve this I will be impressed (and probably not play the game again!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mines effect in two way: actively blowing shit up and lowering enemy troops moral by introducing mine horror. I hope there would be also AP mines and hopefully something more than just claymores, in limited amount for gameplays sake tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like the idea of specialized squad kits, re: Combat Engineers, Combat Medics, Recon/Snipe, Sappers etc.

 

In the traditional US Squad structure, there aren't engineers, just SL, and 2 4 man fireteams.

 

If this game had specialization squads then your mine-laying hangups could be resolved with a sense of realism and cooperation. Perhaps a C.O. could call down a Combat Engineer squad, or perhaps SLs can just opt to be such independent of the C.O. Then the now "Combat Engineering Squad" has access to certain C.E. assets, like a utility truck and 3 spots for combat engineers. They then drive out, one person pulls the truck along while the other 3 men lay mines 1 or 2 at a time, and grab more from the truck as needed. Then they can RTB and take an EOD specd kit and go about disabling enemy IEDs/Mines etc...

 

If a squad is capable of acting as an autonomous body, with spots for all roles, they will do so. If a squad is a specialized unit, they will be called on to assist the team as a whole, whether its combat engineers, or medics etc.

I like the idea of mines being terrifying, but I would like that to be simply one of many means of teams choosing to play tactically. If every game is a game of FPS minesweeper, its gunna get a bit old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I like the idea of mines being terrifying, but I would like that to be simply one of many means of teams choosing to play tactically. If every game is a game of FPS minesweeper, its gunna get a bit old.

true it won't be fun if every game is like that but until now we really didn't have the incentive to even consider EOD as a possible role for a squad and keep in mind that a commander would be required. the probability that a bad commander will use it as a tactic is slim due to the teams incorporation with him, leading instead to the fact that if a mine field is active the enemy probably has a decent commander which would make games a lot more interesting. it is not really mandatory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh in PR you could do this! its just a question of patience (in terms of setting up the minefield) and the reality of the fact that in PR (unlike in real life) if someone is hit by a mine (AP) the entire squad is rarely actually bogged down trying to help said injured soldier. They just turn around and leave, take a different route. With an enhanced medical system, longer spawn times, and genuine weight given to injury, AP minefields can work.

 

On the other hand if a tank is tracked in PR by a mine (AT) it can lead to some genuinely dangerous and realistic responses: BANG! - Tracked Tank E3kp1 - A supply truck is sent out - that Gets killed on its way - Another one sent out with an escort - The impatient gunner of the tank was killed - the truck turns back - a squad nearby diverts to clear out the hostiles and secure for the crew to come back: AT mines already work!

 

Instead of making it a commander asset "hand of god" which i too dislike. All you've gotto do is ask.... How can a single determined squad (not an individual) be allowed to set up a minefield easily? 

 

Basically its not the mines that have to be made more effective: the mines do their job. Real life mine fields are largely ineffective the moment someone realizes they're there. UNLESS, it sits on the only route to the objective but thats a whole nother kettle of fish regarding chokepoints and the freedom of Maps in themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about Anti-Personnel mines? Claymores, trip wires, etc... would allow enemy squads to deny entries to key points, such as buildings with a good view of the map, towns, etc... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh in PR you could do this! its just a question of patience (in terms of setting up the minefield) and the reality of the fact that in PR (unlike in real life) if someone is hit by a mine (AP) the entire squad is rarely actually bogged down trying to help said injured soldier. They just turn around and leave, take a different route. With an enhanced medical system, longer spawn times, and genuine weight given to injury, AP minefields can work.

 

On the other hand if a tank is tracked in PR by a mine (AT) it can lead to some genuinely dangerous and realistic responses: BANG! - Tracked Tank E3kp1 - A supply truck is sent out - that Gets killed on its way - Another one sent out with an escort - The impatient gunner of the tank was killed - the truck turns back - a squad nearby diverts to clear out the hostiles and secure for the crew to come back: AT mines already work!

 

Instead of making it a commander asset "hand of god" which i too dislike. All you've gotto do is ask.... How can a single determined squad (not an individual) be allowed to set up a minefield easily? 

 

Basically its not the mines that have to be made more effective: the mines do their job. Real life mine fields are largely ineffective the moment someone realizes they're there. UNLESS, it sits on the only route to the objective but thats a whole nother kettle of fish regarding chokepoints and the freedom of Maps in themselves.

the scenario you described mainly happens when it is a conventional on conventional, however in insurgency you don't defend your armor, you run the hell out of there. currently in PR dodging a mine is as easy as making a turn right or left when in reality you would block off the section and call in EOD. and that's the problem with mines they can do damage but they can't deny areas. and because one can only tell how long a guy is willing to stay to try and block an area without dying from boredom knowing that most of his effort is pointless.

 

now i will make it clear that giving the ability to lay minefields is only for insurgents, because (if you didn't know) 162 nations signed on Ottawa Treaty which bans the use of AP mines, and using mines in civilian population isn't considered smart by any nation. and it's not really a hand of god since you could find a civilian who would lay a mine for you for a few extra bucks. and it is not as easy as asking because who would bring an insurgent squad to try and lay a minefield for 20 minutes when the vehicle or personal can avoid it as easily as turning right. not to mention they have to stay there since most of their mines are remote. there is no incentive there.

 

mines can deal damage but they currently cant deny access and that's a big flaw because most mines aren't going to ever explode for several reasons. you could read my replies to see more of its benefits (got tired of writing...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about Anti-Personnel mines? Claymores, trip wires, etc... would allow enemy squads to deny entries to key points, such as buildings with a good view of the map, towns, etc... 

they wold however some are remote controlled which means as soon as you die they are useless. trip wires sound fine because they are effective enough as of now but they can't deal with armor at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly, the significances of IEDs in modern, unconventional warfare should not be as understated as it is in Project Reality. The pursuit of fighting against conventional forces as a sapper should be an as detailed and effective dynamic as using small arms. That would be something that would require a lot of thought and balance testing to get right, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently in PR dodging a mine is as easy as making a turn right or left when in reality you would block off the section and call in EOD. and that's the problem with mines they can do damage but they can't deny areas....

 

"Mines can deal damage but they currently cant deny access and that's a big flaw because most mines aren't going to ever explode for several reasons. you could read my replies to see more of its benefits (got tired of writing...)"

But real mines don't necessarily deny access for military vehicles most of which can drive offroad. The whole E.O.D blocking off a section and dealing with the mine thing comes with Reality. Blufor (Nato/US, whoever) is primarily to prevent civilian casualties as their own people will have all been made aware of the position of the mine. Civilians and future convoys may need to use to road.  

 

Point is, as long as there's no incentive to get rid of the mine/ied via "points" (towards Insurgency caches/alike) people are just going to drive around it. That's nothing to do with the effectiveness of the mine, that's to do with the working of the gamemode and motivation of the players. 

 

The OP suggestion was for a commander ability in insurgency only which could put down a minefield, AP or AT specific. This would deny access to areas through its size without having an actual player have to risk their own life laying it.

 

But this is the (imo) "developed" suggestion after thinking about the thread:

 

"I would suggest maybe that the commander could designate the area and an engineer could go there and place it at a faster rate so he won't have to stay there for 20 minutes placing mines, or he would set only a small amount. that would encourage teamwork with commander and would actually reward you for being an engineer making it a possibly more viable role" 

 

In conjunction with intelligence points for disarming it through a combination of metal detecting infantry equipment and Bomb disarming EOD role mechanics. And a more in depth/punishing vehicle respawn system giving weight to the destruction of a vehicle you could see some really immersive situations and interesting game tactics around mines/ambushes in general.

 

Its not hand of god but it gets the job done, you could say that the Insurgent commander had the equipment delivered to that area but its on the players themselves to set it up. As with any deployable/commander asset especially those that "kill" you've got to be careful of exploitation, (placement positions, size, ease of destruction) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The effectiveness of landmines comes also from map design. In current alpha map there is many locations where you could make effective AT-minefields (and some AP depending POIs). The closer the mines are from the area of interest the more it adds up the probability that enemy vehicle will drive to the mine.

 

Ottawa threaty is a joke, pure culmination of double face moral. It doesn't actyally prevent to make AP minefields, since it not prevent cluster-bombs and a like. They are far worse danger to civilians than any minefield made by soldiers, I don't start reasoning this statement use google to get some knowledge if interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×