Weekly BF

Shouldn't AT mine be gadget for Support instead of Assault?

«1
Granathar
249 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
It bothers me way more than it actually should. How is placing mines an "assault"? AT grenades? Sure it is. AT cannon? Well, it's actually both defensive and offensive. But mines? Mines are limpet charges being placed on the ground, why give them to Assault? They are also completely defensive tool which fits the Support role way better. And another thing that I would want sooo badly is that Support has additional "sapper" role. He sees stationary explosives as highlighted (mines, traps) and can defuse them. You know, he should protect these tanks from being blown up, why only by repair tool?

Comments

  • Temp1st
    2464 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    If mines were on support i would never see a reason to play assault other than the SMG.

    You're asking for the strongest AT measure to be put on the non AT class.
  • Granathar
    249 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Temp1st wrote: »
    If mines were on support i would never see a reason to play assault other than the SMG.

    You're asking for the strongest AT measure to be put on the non AT class.

    But Assault has plenty of AT possibilities. AT cannon and AT grenades should be enough. Also it's the Assault who should get limpet charge and it's Support who should have dynamite. Limpet charge should be like 1.5 AT grenade in power. So you throw 2 AT nades and then kiss the tank with limpet charge. After that you throw light AT nade and it should be over. You think this is underpowered?
  • bfloo11111111111
    212 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I'm more likely to use a mine sneaking up behind a tank, or being chased by one.

    I try to avoid getting that close to tanks as support.
  • Astr0damus
    2904 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    For the record: I agree with OP.
    Mines fit with Support better (I believe it was this way in BF3--didn't support have RPG, AT Mines and wrench?)
  • Granathar
    249 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited September 2017
    I'm more likely to use a mine sneaking up behind a tank, or being chased by one.

    I try to avoid getting that close to tanks as support.

    Supports are rather defensive classes due to LMGs being pretty bipod/tripod dependent. Assaults are the front line and they would make a far better use for limpet charge than Support will ever have. Support tends to stay a little behind so he can plant these mines somewhere, fill whole building with dynamite and blow the hell out of it when he's retreating. Limpet charge blows doors, punches holes through walls... this is pure assault tool.
  • olavafar
    1974 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I'd agree that mines (and also dynamite) feels more support stuff than assault stuff since support is partly the new engineer class (wrench). Problem is that there si no good support gadget to trade to assault instead. Which ever you'd choose no one would use it as the AT grenades and rockets are far better in the assault role than anything support has to offer.
  • Granathar
    249 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited September 2017
    olavafar wrote: »
    I'd agree that mines (and also dynamite) feels more support stuff than assault stuff since support is partly the new engineer class (wrench). Problem is that there si no good support gadget to trade to assault instead. Which ever you'd choose no one would use it as the AT grenades and rockets are far better in the assault role than anything support has to offer.

    I would gladly take limpet charge as assault. Mines are annoying to plant while you risk being hammered by a tank. But limpet charge is fast and easy to use, just stick it to his **** and run away. But Support nearly never is so close to enemy tank to actually use it. Assault would have short distance AT gadget - limpet charge, medium distance - AT grenade and long distance - AT cannon. And also possibly light AT grenade as a bonus. Seems fair to me.
  • Astr0damus
    2904 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I run ammo and wrench as support.. but having to give up wrench for mines would suck--I'm sure I would do it though.
    And I agree with Limpet for assault since support doesn't typically carry it anyway.
  • DingoKillr
    3635 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited September 2017
    Here is the reaction I got 5 months ago when I suggested to switch AT mine for Limpet, the reason was gadget should fit their classes better.

    "Please don't ever post something like this in the CTE sub again."
    https://www.reddit.com/r/battlefield_live/comments/66nde9/assault_and_pepper/

    Here I was think that is the best place for it.

    Edit: I did a post too for adjusting Support have a look at the complaints about removing limpet.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/battlefield_live/comments/64i7in/make_support_great_again/
  • GRIZZ11283
    4839 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I run support and would not like my limpets given away.
    How very dare you suggest such nonsense.
  • Granathar
    249 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    GRIZZ11283 wrote: »
    I run support and would not like my limpets given away.
    How very dare you suggest such nonsense.

    You wouldn't trade it for brand new AT mine? I think I would. Because I have time to plant mines as support, when I play assault I run around, throw nades and shoot everything that moves. Same thing with dynamite. When you defend position it's great. But when you attack? If I could throw this further - I would use it, but I can't even properly throw it through the window, so I don't even bother. Both dynamite and mines are defensive tools and fit support way better. Limpet is offensive tool and Assault would use it better. Support has crossbow that is somewhat offensive... but actually pretty crappy anyway.
  • GRIZZ11283
    4839 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Mines are put down and forgot about, any class can do that, its not really suited to anything.
    Now I would consider dynamite for a swap, its like having 3 limpets In one go ;)
  • x_Undaunted_x
    3760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    GRIZZ11283 wrote: »
    I run support and would not like my limpets given away.
    How very dare you suggest such nonsense.

    I don't want to lose limpets either. It's one of the best attractions for me playing support.

    I'm also against giving support the AT mine since they could have infinite resupplies of mines (provided they're using an ammo crate.) Assault is the primary "take out vehicles" class and should remain that way.
    Granathar wrote: »
    And another thing that I would want sooo badly is that Support has additional "sapper" role. He sees stationary explosives as highlighted (mines, traps) and can defuse them. You know, he should protect these tanks from being blown up, why only by repair tool?

    Personally, I would rather this role be with assault (as was the case in previous battlefields.) I also liked where, in previous battlefields, if you found enemy mines and shot them once, the mines became yours which would detonate if an enemy ran over them. I would love to go back to that. Technically, the support doesn't need to defuse. Since ammo crates can resupply, just chuck a grenade on mines or shoot them until they blow up. IMO, an action to defuse them would be a waste of resources because of this.
  • Granathar
    249 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    [
    I'm also against giving support the AT mine since they could have infinite resupplies of mines (provided they're using an ammo crate.) Assault is the primary "take out vehicles" class and should remain that way.

    You can't have more than 6 mines active. Also I can't see any problem with resupplying. He already can resupply crossbow grenades, normal grenades and limpet charges. And for some reason it's not a problem to anyone.
  • canon35mm
    236 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    All of you saying you run from tanks as support should try hammering a tank to death with the repair wrench. It is the best part of this game. Or stealing a tank when the tanker hops out... so satisfying.
  • x_Undaunted_x
    3760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Granathar wrote: »
    [
    I'm also against giving support the AT mine since they could have infinite resupplies of mines (provided they're using an ammo crate.) Assault is the primary "take out vehicles" class and should remain that way.

    You can't have more than 6 mines active. Also I can't see any problem with resupplying. He already can resupply crossbow grenades, normal grenades and limpet charges. And for some reason it's not a problem to anyone.

    A single crossbow grenade, light AT grenade, and limpet charges can't destroy vehicles unless they are extremely low on health. That's why no one has a problem with them (or at least *shouldn't* have a problem with them.) Support isn't the "anti-vehicle" class. I'm guessing this is why assault now has dynamite instead of support since, in previous BF's, the support had C4 (and people whined about that too.)
  • DingoKillr
    3635 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Granathar wrote: »
    [
    I'm also against giving support the AT mine since they could have infinite resupplies of mines (provided they're using an ammo crate.) Assault is the primary "take out vehicles" class and should remain that way.

    You can't have more than 6 mines active. Also I can't see any problem with resupplying. He already can resupply crossbow grenades, normal grenades and limpet charges. And for some reason it's not a problem to anyone.

    A single crossbow grenade, light AT grenade, and limpet charges can't destroy vehicles unless they are extremely low on health. That's why no one has a problem with them (or at least *shouldn't* have a problem with them.) Support isn't the "anti-vehicle" class. I'm guessing this is why assault now has dynamite instead of support since, in previous BF's, the support had C4 (and people whined about that too.)

    So did Recon, but Support was worse as the could resupply after chucking 3 on a quad.

    However Support has a weapon which by itself can destroy any tank. The Mortar.
  • GRIZZ11283
    4839 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    Granathar wrote: »
    [
    I'm also against giving support the AT mine since they could have infinite resupplies of mines (provided they're using an ammo crate.) Assault is the primary "take out vehicles" class and should remain that way.

    You can't have more than 6 mines active. Also I can't see any problem with resupplying. He already can resupply crossbow grenades, normal grenades and limpet charges. And for some reason it's not a problem to anyone.

    A single crossbow grenade, light AT grenade, and limpet charges can't destroy vehicles unless they are extremely low on health. That's why no one has a problem with them (or at least *shouldn't* have a problem with them.) Support isn't the "anti-vehicle" class. I'm guessing this is why assault now has dynamite instead of support since, in previous BF's, the support had C4 (and people whined about that too.)

    So did Recon, but Support was worse as the could resupply after chucking 3 on a quad.

    However Support has a weapon which by itself can destroy any tank. The Mortar.

    How many tanks have you destroyed with a mortar from 100% health?
    Any decent tank driver won't be destroyed by a mortar single handed.
    Its virtually pointless once you land one shot, even infantry are hard to kill with a mortar if they're at 100%.
    Its really not any good against tanks.
  • someguy12121
    467 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Um how about no. AT mines have ALWAYS been in this class and would make no sense to remove it from the class.
  • Astr0damus
    2904 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    canon35mm wrote: »
    All of you saying you run from tanks as support should try hammering a tank to death with the repair wrench. It is the best part of this game. Or stealing a tank when the tanker hops out... so satisfying.

    admittedly, I need to try doing this more.
    Is it pretty quick to take a healthy tank down with a wrench?
Sign In or Register to comment.