Have the grenadiers chose between using anti-personnell mines, or anti-tank mines. The first type, Anti-Personnell, are shrapnel charges, that do area-of-effect damage when detonated. They kill or damage unarmored targets. They do very little to no damage to tanks. In theory, a single mine can kill or seriously cripple a group of infantry that walk too close to each other. The second type, Anti-Armour, make use of shaped charge technology. As these mines are huge and heavy, the scouts can only carry 2 of them normaly, or 3 with the Extra Ammo skill. These do massive damage to armor, effectively damaging all armor plates on the side they hit to a certain level, and doing direct damage to the hull, since they are armor-piercing to an effect. Infantry doesn't set this one off, because of the massive weight of a vehicle is required to trigger the detonator mechanism. Mines should not be stackable. Nor should they have the "push" effect when detonated, at least that they don't flip the heavier types of vehicles. Mines should not be placeable inside buildings at all, mostly because this will render the abovementioned mines overpowered, especially the A-A ones, if placed inside a baracks can slay a batch of newly-spawned infantry. Pros: +Poor grenadiers don't get their anti-tank minefields blown up by one god damn scout crawling where he doesn't belong. Cons: -Less mines for grenadiers to work with, locking them into an either anti-tank or anti-infantry role.
Oh shit, something needs a small amount of Strategy and thinking, thus it is a con... WTF? Adding tactics, thinking, strategy and things that take some effort compared to dumbed down RTS & FPS games is not a con... Either way I like it, but simplified. Anti-Infantry mines explode when a player walks by, Anti-Vehicle mines explode when a vehicles drive over the mine,
So you want to remove the one thing that actually can hurt a tank from the grenaider.... Why? Why is the scout equipped with mines? So how do you propose a grenadier deal with Heavy tanks, since you want to eliminate every conceviable way for a grenaider to deal damage to a heavy tank. Sounds more like you want to nerf grenadier into oblivion...
No, just want different types of mines. I do want to buff the grenadier, but not with mines. AA mines would still be very effective against armored opponents. Scout isn't supposed to have mines. Error in communication between me and you. As is, the grenadier can't deal with heavies anyway, exept for stacking mines on each other. That I dislike, and therefore propose anti-armour mines, and anti-infantry mines to use in different occasions.
Close minefields generally aren't effective because the chain reaction only blows the front. Usual tactic is to put multiple mines in one area which infantry generally avoid. That does some damage. Large minefields that close together are a waste anyway. Besides, mines are already underpowered since anyone with defusal can run them.
Can we drop these dumb suggestions please. Why not divide the engineer into medic and mechanic, huh? Because it'll fucking suck, that's why.
Better idea: Primary fire sets an anti-tank mine, which uses two mine slots and does 2.5 times normal mine damage, and you can't stack them, they are 1.5 times bigger than normal mines and are only set off by tanks. Secondary fire sets an anti-infantry mine, which does half the damage but has a wider area of effect and detonator radius and only uses one slot, they are set off by infantry and tanks but as they do less damage than a normal mine they aren't as efficient, the plus side is that they can be spread over a much wider area and as such can still be used to stop light vehicles. Grenadier mine cap is raised to twelve. Grenadiers get more control over what trips their mines, better mines for all situations, and minefields become actual minefields rather than 8minemicroblackholes. 2.5 times normal damage is enough to put a serious dent in any tank, although this is offset by the mines being easier to spot, whereas the harder to spot and easier to trigger infantry mines are more of an annoyance.
Then nobody would use anti-tank mines. 2x dmg vs 2.5x damage (stacking), yet the 2x damage mine can kill infantry giving you that one extra rank point
I thought I said you couldn't stack mines? Oh also, using this system you could make it so that infantry mines can be detonated by explosives, and then make it so that defusal doesn't make you immune to mines. So, in order to defuse AT mines, you need infantry with defusal, but to defuse infantry mines, you can drive over them with a tank, or throw grenades at them (in case they're in a corridor or something). Thus, when laying a minefield, it would be wise to lay a couple of infantry mines here and there to catch grenadiers who aren't paying attention when defusing the field. Of course you could also just use a tank to defuse any minefield if you retreat and repair, so it's not as if teamwork is required, it's just helpful.
Don't like it. Mines are working fine right now. Anti infantry mines will be overpowered on maps without tanks. And anti tank mines will be overpowered on maps, where tanks have no space.
Pay attention please, how is it overpowered to have infantry mines you can defuse with grenades? Or tank mines which can be defused by infantry and CANNOT BE STACKED. That means there's a finite number of mines which can be placed in one area. Use your brain once in a while.
/signed. Providing chain-reactions are still included if they're placed too close. (sure, it wastes the mines but forces them to be spaced) I endorse all ideas from this man in this thread.
Chris0132: I like what you did there. +1. SIP: Are HMG overpowered on Infantry-only maps? Or are Sticky Grenades overpowered on maps where tanks can't move around too much?
I was drawing an analogy to how you said that AA and AP mines would be overpowered on certain maps, but so are other types of equipment. Light tanks are OP on big open maps, yes. HMG are overpowered on infantry only. The terrain controls the combat a lot more than the commander does. Some equipment would be viable on certain maps, other will not. Your point is moot.
Why is HMG overpowered, cause it does the job its meant to do? That's like saying mines are too good against people who set them off. HMG does exactly what it's meant to do, supress and mow down infantry. It's in no way impossible to counter it, nor is it hard. Just like nade spam from engis behind a wall is OP vs rax. It's only good in it's own element. Outside of that, it's worthless.
