ANTI-TANK mines are over powered (when launched like dynamite)

124»

Comments

  • WinterWarhurst
    1319 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Always have been able to in previous titles to place mines next to a tank and grenade the mines to blow up and destroy the tank. The ability to shooting them makes it a bit easier, but there is no substantial tactical difference.

    Yeah no one is complaining about that, it’s more about how quickly you can fling all your mines and then detonate them with this method, the TTK is incredibly fast, especially considering tanks are arguably ill-equipped to defend against it.
  • HairballHacker
    19 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    OP, you are wrong.
  • Iightblack
    158 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Title is less misleading now, hopefully people recognise what the complaint is about!

    I hope me too!
  • Iightblack
    158 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I've been using the banana in the tailpipe against tanks and mobile AAs since BF3. Drop a couple of mines right behind the camping tank/AA, move off a few yards, detonate the mines with a grenade or at one time a .44 magnum revolver (they later made it so the .44 wouldn't set off explosives). Then wait for the hackusation, because the kill feed will show whatever set off the mines as the cause of death, so the guy in the tank wants to know how you killed him with a grenade or .44....

    It was always possible to dash in front of or behind a moving tank and drop a couple of mines, tankers who feel threatened tend to back up so mines behind the vehicle often work. But suddenly everybody is putting mines right beside a tank and setting them off with a grenade or rifle. Perhaps it's because the heavy tanks in BFV are so slow that this has become a more viable tactic. But most of the time it works against tanks that are sitting still because the tanker in concentrating on shooting in first-person view so he's oblivious to his surroundings.

    If this is really a game-breaking issue (and I'm skeptical about that no matter how much it annoys the turretheads) a possible solution would be to make it so only a grenade or dynamite charge can set off the mines, shooting them won't work. Since we only get one grenade at a time a lot of players might have already used theirs and thus will have no way to set off the mines. Since Supports don't have dynamite they would need the cooperation of an Assault teammate if they don't have a grenade.

    DICE has changed how explosive thowables work before, e.g. when C4 was being used like a grenade in BF4 they slowed the reload rate and I think shortened the distance it could be thrown, that was largely an issue on indoor infantry maps like Metro and Locker where a Support could sit over a staircase or whatever and spam C4 all day. It makes sense that AT mines should not be able to be thrown more than a meter or two, they are not Frisbees--actually if the mine is armed the user would treat it very gently and not toss it around. Maybe the Support class needs an alternate gadget, a demotion charge in place of AT mines. In that case I'd be okay with mines being drive-over-only weapons, with the demo charge capable destroying a tank only if it's placed on top or directly underneath (where the armor is much thinner), otherwise it takes off a track and wrecks the suspension on one side. But I still feel like a tanker who is sitting still and ignoring his immediate surroundings deserves what he gets when somebody puts explosives on him, so a demo charge might be the answer with AT mines being as described above.

    I can agree, good post, because a solution could be a slower placement time and a damage reduction if they are not under the tank... but IMHO mines still would be a better dynamite. They should explode only if touched by a tank.
  • Iightblack
    158 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Always have been able to in previous titles to place mines next to a tank and grenade the mines to blow up and destroy the tank. The ability to shooting them makes it a bit easier, but there is no substantial tactical difference.

    You right, I forgot that also granades should disable mines (without explosion).
  • full951
    2423 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    friendly mines launch when you shoot em'? cool. will try.
  • MBT_Layzan
    1402 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Always have been able to in previous titles to place mines next to a tank and grenade the mines to blow up and destroy the tank. The ability to shooting them makes it a bit easier, but there is no substantial tactical difference.

    But I do think this game is easier for infantry to zerg up on armour. The spawn speed, squad spawn system, map design, lack of spotting, slower tanks, slower turrets, it all adds up.
  • WinterWarhurst
    1319 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    MBT_Layzan wrote: »
    Always have been able to in previous titles to place mines next to a tank and grenade the mines to blow up and destroy the tank. The ability to shooting them makes it a bit easier, but there is no substantial tactical difference.

    But I do think this game is easier for infantry to zerg up on armour. The spawn speed, squad spawn system, map design, lack of spotting, slower tanks, slower turrets, it all adds up.

    Exactly, in this game it’s far more difficult to break distance and therefore get to cover and defilades, etc. You are overrun far easier, particularly if attempting to play the objectives in my opinion!
  • Duece09
    185 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    naitch44 wrote: »
    Disagree, they stick out like a sore thumb if a tank driver runs over them then more fool them.....

    As for someone rushing you, you should be able to spot them coming a mile away its no different than someone using dynamite.

    Did you even read the OP? Just just read the title and think you have a understanding?
  • Duece09
    185 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    The damage output and everything like that is perfect where it is. But I do agree with the OP it’s just silly and dumb that you can fling these halfway across the map. Mines should be placed on the ground and maybe take some time to be placed because they have to be placed and then set to detonate that way you can’t just throw them around everywhere. I get it, this is a video game so Dice just lets everyone use mines like grenades basically, but at the end of the day it’s silly.
  • MBT_Layzan
    1402 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    MBT_Layzan wrote: »
    Always have been able to in previous titles to place mines next to a tank and grenade the mines to blow up and destroy the tank. The ability to shooting them makes it a bit easier, but there is no substantial tactical difference.

    But I do think this game is easier for infantry to zerg up on armour. The spawn speed, squad spawn system, map design, lack of spotting, slower tanks, slower turrets, it all adds up.

    Exactly, in this game it’s far more difficult to break distance and therefore get to cover and defilades, etc. You are overrun far easier, particularly if attempting to play the objectives in my opinion!

    And the infantry know it, seriously I know as I'm sure you do how to tank and when you back out. But assault are on you so fast on most maps, your on fire, disabled trying to get away and that's in the faster tanks. Even if you get away your are taking rounds while they chase after you. You can't really fire back because trying to remember to hold lock, while trying to not get caught on terrain, while in 3rd person, while trying to dodge fire is just an overload to the brain. To add your are bouncing all over the place, with smoke and fire effects.

    You can get vaporised in seconds even at friendly flags surrounded by your side on maps like twisted.
  • WinterWarhurst
    1319 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    MBT_Layzan wrote: »
    MBT_Layzan wrote: »
    Always have been able to in previous titles to place mines next to a tank and grenade the mines to blow up and destroy the tank. The ability to shooting them makes it a bit easier, but there is no substantial tactical difference.

    But I do think this game is easier for infantry to zerg up on armour. The spawn speed, squad spawn system, map design, lack of spotting, slower tanks, slower turrets, it all adds up.

    Exactly, in this game it’s far more difficult to break distance and therefore get to cover and defilades, etc. You are overrun far easier, particularly if attempting to play the objectives in my opinion!

    And the infantry know it, seriously I know as I'm sure you do how to tank and when you back out. But assault are on you so fast on most maps, your on fire, disabled trying to get away and that's in the faster tanks. Even if you get away your are taking rounds while they chase after you. You can't really fire back because trying to remember to hold lock, while trying to not get caught on terrain, while in 3rd person, while trying to dodge fire is just an overload to the brain. To add your are bouncing all over the place, with smoke and fire effects.

    You can get vaporised in seconds even at friendly flags surrounded by your side on maps like twisted.

    Yeah that’s precisely the problem, you get so stuck and spun around on terrain, that you really have to lock the turret and look behind you and back up without returning fire, despite knowing you’re probably going to get Panzerfaust through that multiple times either way. It’s sad because it really means you’re simply better off camping and farming infantry from a distance. Fun times.

    As things are I just have the minimap zoomed out max and I just try to stay somewhere behind the central mass of our infantry forces, however I’ve found that on most maps people are backcapping so fast it really just ends up meaning you’re being sandwiched between all their sneaky flankers and your main Zerg force with little room for escape and ironically little (aware) infantry support despite being so close to your entire team, these maps just provide so many angles of attack from behind flags and flanking opportunities, which is cool, but also makes things miles harder for us.

    I mean people say use infantry support, but how often do you play with infantry that actually protect tanks when they’re in trouble? It’s rare, and something I know I always drill into my platoon mates, and I play with some of the best!
  • Iightblack
    158 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I agree... the problem becomes bigger if we think about the others problems... like first and third person disconnected, a slow aim system with mouse acceleration and input lag, a little rock on the ground that seems a mountain...
  • R1ckyDaMan19
    456 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    To be fair I am getting more proficient at spotting and killing anyone trying to bonzai me, still crazy how fast you die if they hit the things though.
  • Jezzzeh
    753 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Just as aside. I love it so much when a full transport of guys rolls over my mines when I'm halfway across the map. That is so satisfying :)
  • R1ckyDaMan19
    456 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Jezzzeh wrote: »
    Just as aside. I love it so much when a full transport of guys rolls over my mines when I'm halfway across the map. That is so satisfying :)

    See, that is fair game and gg to you.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I think the easiest solution would be to have a proper AT mine deployment animation similar to the revive animation.

    Who in their right mind would arm a mine then chuck it at the ground or on a tank right in front of them. The thought is actually terrifying, surely you should have to place it on the ground and then arm it?

    For me it’s the rate of deployment that’s the real problem, because it leads to cheap kamikazee tactics.

    I'd be okay with mines having to be emplaced, in other words placed in a hole in the ground and covered up which would take a few moments, but in exchange that would make the mine invisible. I can just imagine the reaction from the tanker community to that. Not only has DICE not gone with covered mines, at one point in BF4 they put a little blinking light on AT mines so even the more oblivious tankers had trouble rolling over them (although many still managed to do so). Historically mines were sometimes placed on top of the ground if there wasn't time to dig them in, but of course they probably weren't thrown there for obvious reasons. So I suppose we could go with placing the mine on the ground and then taking a moment to arm it. That would remove those kamikaze tactics except when the tanker was camping and really not paying attention. Now what do Support players get in return for what would in effect be a big nerf of their AT capabilities? I think a demolition charge they could carry instead of mines would be fair, and if applied to the top of a tank or thrown underneath the tank it would cause heavy damage, with lighter damage if placed on the more heavily armored parts. Of course a demo charge would also be great for destroying fortifications or buildings containing enemy troops.

    As for the obviously hazardous nature of throwing armed mines on the ground, what about running around with a couple of fused bundles of dynamite on you? Should we force Assaults to take a moment to go through an animation of them putting blasting caps in their dynamite and attaching fuses? And where are the wires from the detonator to the dynamite charges? Since we're on the subject of unrealistic game mechanics, how does one guy drive a tank and load/fire the weapons all at the same time? If we complain about one unrealistic element--throwing armed AT mines on the ground--where do we draw the line, how many other highly unrealistic elements do we remove or change?

    I'm open to adjusting tanks and AT weapons in this game, but it can't be a one-way street.
  • WinterWarhurst
    1319 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I think the easiest solution would be to have a proper AT mine deployment animation similar to the revive animation.

    Who in their right mind would arm a mine then chuck it at the ground or on a tank right in front of them. The thought is actually terrifying, surely you should have to place it on the ground and then arm it?

    For me it’s the rate of deployment that’s the real problem, because it leads to cheap kamikazee tactics.

    I'd be okay with mines having to be emplaced, in other words placed in a hole in the ground and covered up which would take a few moments, but in exchange that would make the mine invisible. I can just imagine the reaction from the tanker community to that. Not only has DICE not gone with covered mines, at one point in BF4 they put a little blinking light on AT mines so even the more oblivious tankers had trouble rolling over them (although many still managed to do so). Historically mines were sometimes placed on top of the ground if there wasn't time to dig them in, but of course they probably weren't thrown there for obvious reasons. So I suppose we could go with placing the mine on the ground and then taking a moment to arm it. That would remove those kamikaze tactics except when the tanker was camping and really not paying attention. Now what do Support players get in return for what would in effect be a big nerf of their AT capabilities? I think a demolition charge they could carry instead of mines would be fair, and if applied to the top of a tank or thrown underneath the tank it would cause heavy damage, with lighter damage if placed on the more heavily armored parts. Of course a demo charge would also be great for destroying fortifications or buildings containing enemy troops.

    As for the obviously hazardous nature of throwing armed mines on the ground, what about running around with a couple of fused bundles of dynamite on you? Should we force Assaults to take a moment to go through an animation of them putting blasting caps in their dynamite and attaching fuses? And where are the wires from the detonator to the dynamite charges? Since we're on the subject of unrealistic game mechanics, how does one guy drive a tank and load/fire the weapons all at the same time? If we complain about one unrealistic element--throwing armed AT mines on the ground--where do we draw the line, how many other highly unrealistic elements do we remove or change?

    I'm open to adjusting tanks and AT weapons in this game, but it can't be a one-way street.

    I was just suggesting that the AT mine animation should be closer to the revive animation than what it currently is, which seems to be a high rate of deployment fling typically followed by a spray and pray.
  • DukeSan27
    1109 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I think the easiest solution would be to have a proper AT mine deployment animation similar to the revive animation.

    Who in their right mind would arm a mine then chuck it at the ground or on a tank right in front of them. The thought is actually terrifying, surely you should have to place it on the ground and then arm it?

    For me it’s the rate of deployment that’s the real problem, because it leads to cheap kamikazee tactics.

    I'd be okay with mines having to be emplaced, in other words placed in a hole in the ground and covered up which would take a few moments, but in exchange that would make the mine invisible. I can just imagine the reaction from the tanker community to that. Not only has DICE not gone with covered mines, at one point in BF4 they put a little blinking light on AT mines so even the more oblivious tankers had trouble rolling over them (although many still managed to do so). Historically mines were sometimes placed on top of the ground if there wasn't time to dig them in, but of course they probably weren't thrown there for obvious reasons. So I suppose we could go with placing the mine on the ground and then taking a moment to arm it. That would remove those kamikaze tactics except when the tanker was camping and really not paying attention. Now what do Support players get in return for what would in effect be a big nerf of their AT capabilities? I think a demolition charge they could carry instead of mines would be fair, and if applied to the top of a tank or thrown underneath the tank it would cause heavy damage, with lighter damage if placed on the more heavily armored parts. Of course a demo charge would also be great for destroying fortifications or buildings containing enemy troops.

    As for the obviously hazardous nature of throwing armed mines on the ground, what about running around with a couple of fused bundles of dynamite on you? Should we force Assaults to take a moment to go through an animation of them putting blasting caps in their dynamite and attaching fuses? And where are the wires from the detonator to the dynamite charges? Since we're on the subject of unrealistic game mechanics, how does one guy drive a tank and load/fire the weapons all at the same time? If we complain about one unrealistic element--throwing armed AT mines on the ground--where do we draw the line, how many other highly unrealistic elements do we remove or change?

    I'm open to adjusting tanks and AT weapons in this game, but it can't be a one-way street.

    You got that backwards with that one way street.

  • Iightblack
    158 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I think the easiest solution would be to have a proper AT mine deployment animation similar to the revive animation.

    Who in their right mind would arm a mine then chuck it at the ground or on a tank right in front of them. The thought is actually terrifying, surely you should have to place it on the ground and then arm it?

    For me it’s the rate of deployment that’s the real problem, because it leads to cheap kamikazee tactics.

    I'd be okay with mines having to be emplaced, in other words placed in a hole in the ground and covered up which would take a few moments, but in exchange that would make the mine invisible. I can just imagine the reaction from the tanker community to that. Not only has DICE not gone with covered mines, at one point in BF4 they put a little blinking light on AT mines so even the more oblivious tankers had trouble rolling over them (although many still managed to do so). Historically mines were sometimes placed on top of the ground if there wasn't time to dig them in, but of course they probably weren't thrown there for obvious reasons. So I suppose we could go with placing the mine on the ground and then taking a moment to arm it. That would remove those kamikaze tactics except when the tanker was camping and really not paying attention. Now what do Support players get in return for what would in effect be a big nerf of their AT capabilities? I think a demolition charge they could carry instead of mines would be fair, and if applied to the top of a tank or thrown underneath the tank it would cause heavy damage, with lighter damage if placed on the more heavily armored parts. Of course a demo charge would also be great for destroying fortifications or buildings containing enemy troops.

    As for the obviously hazardous nature of throwing armed mines on the ground, what about running around with a couple of fused bundles of dynamite on you? Should we force Assaults to take a moment to go through an animation of them putting blasting caps in their dynamite and attaching fuses? And where are the wires from the detonator to the dynamite charges? Since we're on the subject of unrealistic game mechanics, how does one guy drive a tank and load/fire the weapons all at the same time? If we complain about one unrealistic element--throwing armed AT mines on the ground--where do we draw the line, how many other highly unrealistic elements do we remove or change?

    I'm open to adjusting tanks and AT weapons in this game, but it can't be a one-way street.

    I do NOT complain it because unrealistic (Battlefield is not a simulative game), but because unbalanced.
Sign In or Register to comment.