Nah prox mines arent fun. Nobody has ever been like "OH MAN THAT PROX MINE JUST KILLED ME THIS IS FUN! THE GUY WHO PUT IT THERE IS GOOD!"

The only way they would be acceptable is if they showed up on radar, or were very, very obvious.

Remote mines are bad enough, prox mines are just remote mines without any skill involved at all.

So you want ti make this game COD with the casual attitude?

I'd like popper mines, like in Resistance. When they pop up you have a chance to shoot them before they kill you. I always hated my instant deaths from claymores in MAG... but liked using them, it was an easy kill.

Whoever says shotguns are easy kills and require no skill has obviously never realized what kind of situational awareness and map knowledge they require. The best place for a shotgunner to be shooting somebody is in the back and that doesn't happen by just charging straight at somebody.

Why do you guys think we need claymore mines? Aside from the whole "Front Toward Enemy" thing, the birdshot, and the range (IIRC, they're effective to something like maybe fifty meters) the claymore is pretty much the same thing as this game's RE: a command-detonated anti-personnel explosive. The first two points, directionality and the metal bearings, can be disregarded - unless I'm mistaken, friendlies can sit on the damn things when you set them off, and, the shot, added to the real-life weapon to make it deadly, isn't necessary, because, sci-fi video game. The range might conceivably be a little more desirable in a deployable weapon, but I don't think it's really something worth making a cause of.

"Kill every red dot within this circle 3- or 5- (or whatever it is) meters in diameter" versus "kill every red dot within this 50-meter-long and 20-meter-wide at the base triangle"? Using my admittedly pulled-out-of-my-ass numbers, that makes the RE's area of effect somewhere in the 20m^2 neighborhood, and the claymore's would be like 500m^2. Even if the RE's radius were ten meters, you're still talking only 314m^2. I think it would take about a half-hour from them being put in the game for the forum to be swamped with "OMFG CLAYMOERZ R TEH OP" threads.

*Le me climbing ladder to get to a sniper at the top of Ashland
Me: Hey, look, a claymore... crap
*BOOM

Yeah, sorry, that's a no on claymores.

You've never climbed those ladders have you? One does not simply "climb again"

You're a moron... honestly.

I don't think claymores would be great for this game. I really liked claymores in SOCOM because they made you more cautious and punished you for running aroung carelessly, but that game was 3rd person so you could check around corners in the usual places. Because you could look around corners it was still semi fair, and required the claymore layer to think carefully about it's location.
Now if we're talking about the automatic proxy/laser mines that for some reason games have been calling claymores, I really don't think we need those. At least with real claymores you have to be paying attention to activate them when an enemy is near, but with proxy mines it's just cheap and makes the layer not have to pay attention or watch their back.

It'd give people a reason to use active scanners and precision enhancers while adding a new level of strategy to the battlefield.

How about no...