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

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.

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.

Easy kill? no skill?

Kind of reminds me of when I run around with my shotgun :) But seriously.. Good valid points mentioned here before. Still think the claymore could add value to the game if done correctly.

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.

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.

Yes, both sides get it, but the problem is: It encourages a type of gameplay I find to be boring and rewards camping and less agressive play and punishes agressive play and folks who actually drive the fight forward.

Anything that encourages camping and discourages aggression needs to be thought about carefully, otherwise you make the game slower and usually less fun. Sniper fests are boring, dynamic skirmishes with both sides attacking and flanking are fun. prox mines empowers the former and handicaps the latter.

... this discussion is about anti infantry prox mines ...

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.

Has there been a thread on this forum without a "OMFG CLAYMOERZ R TEH OP" discussion on any weapon in this game? :)

Why then do I see them charging me a lot? Not to mention the fact that the range on those damn things seems ridiculous, scout comes charging at me spamming his shotgun and I go down even though I've been dumping my SMG into his chest?

How's that work?

I saw this after posting the thing I just posted, and now I'm confused...

Um, anti-personnel proximity mines? I thought it was about claymores?

I would absolutely disagree with the implantation of Claymores or other Anti Infantry Proximity charges. RE's that pretty much dont require you to do anything, the only reason i dont mind RE's is the fact that the guy actually needs to pay attention to the objectives, with claymores its just.... Sit back die like a noob, and get kills because people run into your mines, call it skill. COD STYLE.

No, no, my confusion is the "proximity" part. While they can certainly be rigged to a trip-wire or a timer or whatever you want, that's all field-expedient jury-rigging and stuff. Out-of-the-box, they're manually triggered.

No, no, my confusion is the "proximity" part. While they can certainly be rigged to a trip-wire or a timer or whatever you want, that's all field-expedient jury-rigging and stuff. Out-of-the-box, they're manually triggered.

Yeah, I think COD started the video-game convention that claymores are proximity mines.

If they run into your blatantly obvious mines, they are as bad as you.

Yeah, I think COD started the video-game convention that claymores are proximity mines.

Yes, both sides get it, but the problem is: It encourages a type of gameplay I find to be boring and rewards camping and less agressive play and punishes agressive play and folks who actually drive the fight forward.

Anything that encourages camping and discourages aggression needs to be thought about carefully, otherwise you make the game slower and usually less fun. Sniper fests are boring, dynamic skirmishes with both sides attacking and flanking are fun. prox mines empowers the former and handicaps the latter.

*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.

Then you climb again? Drop an uplink close by? Cry less?? Many options/solutions for skilled gamers playing the game when the claymores come into play.

claymores encourage camping. Camping is lame and not fun. COD has claymores and you can just secure a nifty sniper spot and use claymores to watch your make. Even if someone kills the claymore it still warns you of their approach, fun...

Difficult IS good. Easy kills are lame. Claymores dont require skills to use. They rely on the other player making a mistake and not on you doing well. That type of gameplay is bad. Its not fun to be killed by a claymore/prox mine, and its not rewarding to get such a cheap kill.

This game already encourages camping a ton. We dont need more.

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

you are cherry picking here dude.. Off topic talking about ladders. Most weapons can take me down on top of those stairs. Claymores are no different as long as you can take them down/out.

You're a moron... honestly.

Disagree with this. Planting claymores in good position takes skill. Even so, just take away the killing damage...have them do 200 damage so they can only kill wounded players and beginner scouts (sorry guys...you wanted speed right?)

Then its more supplemental damage.

Give us points for shooting them tho. Also let active scanners point out their locations.

There is nothing you can do about a claymore at the top of the ladders on that map. You cannot just "take them down/out", the only way to do that would be to set it off, and I fully expect that to be fatal. People can still do that with proximity explosives, but at least those require that the user is paying attention.

Basically Claymores would be EZ mode.

How about.... read my first post in this thread?

There's nothing you can do - but what if you step on it, and it beeps, but then it doesn't go off unless you shoot it or move away?

So you climb up, step on the claymore because it's RIGHT THERE, but then you KILL THE GUY ANYWAY, and if you have an Uplink, you can toss it down then jump or run off the mine and end it. Or wait for someone to spawn on the Uplink, and they can hack and disable the mine, letting you move on. And if you don't have an Uplink, you can either rest easy knowing you got the guy, or you can call for someone to come over and help you out.

Yeah, if we ever get proximity mines then I fully expect a basic one to do less damage than a locus grenade.

'' oh hey I'll run out the red zone, put my noob weapon on a letter, wait for kills in my hidey hole, then do it again and again ''

Also countered by my suggestions.

Walk over to the objective to hack it, hear a warning beep letting you know you stepped on a prox mine. Let your squadmate know you stepped on a mine, and while you're hacking the objective, he comes over and hacks the mine to disable it. If you were rushing and didn't hear the beep, or weren't paying attention, you get blown up. If they were smart, and anticipated your direction of approach, they might have put it just OUTSIDE hack range, so you were held up and had to wait for reinforcements - or you might be more likely to mis the tone when you're close to your objective, giving better odds on blowing you up.

Yes, because as we all know, landmines are packed with less explosives than grenades. I would expect them to do the equivalent of a grenade, just either in a single direction or with a tighter blast radius.

Yes, because we all know that things have to make sense in video games.

HMGs have less range then ARs because why exactly?

Missile splash damage sucks why?

Pistols do more headshot damage than your average gun in like every shooter ever made why?

I'm pretty sure that a proximity mine should do more damage than a grenade in real life, that doesn't mean that will actually be the case if you see them in game. Realness, lore, and even common sense take a backseat when it comes to balance.

Not played many FPS's have you.

Certainly not with claymores in, well I have, and in every single game without exception, they are easy noob kills.

So again, no.

How about a Nova Claymore for heavies, a huge CQC weapon that can take out MAV's?

i would like to see some sort of calymore in the game, but do them the CCP say of doing them...

Really obvious, really big and noisy and really powerful... i am thinking goldeneye laser mines.

How about mines that are more like a warning signal than an actual kill device? For example, a sniper could use a proximity mine in an entrance near him so it would act as a warning. The player who triggered the mine might only take 100 damage or so, but at least the sniper has a warning. Also, crouching past the mines should not set them off. If you are trying to be super stealthy, make that the way to get past them.

If you really wanted to go overboard, there could even be a skill for hacking them/ disarming them. Great for enemy nanohives as well.

There wasnt really a complaint about remotes in there. They are fine. Getting killed by one is annoying, but they are relatively fun and require some skill. My point is, prox mines are just remote mines without skill.

And this discussion is about anti infantry prox mines, not anti tank. I dont think anyone really cares about anti tank prox mines because they are relatively useless. (mainly good for keeping lavs out of bases).

Prox mines/claymores could have a role, but they would need to be more obvious than remote mines and/or provide means to escape. A delay explosion with a trigger sound, allowing you to find and shoot the mine would be perfect.

Hahaha, nah we should should get Raam's sword and a Kryll shield.

i approve of proximity mines. they may not be fun when you get killed by them but they are fun to use.

i never hear of anyone saying " ahahaha that ar user shot me what a jolly good time" in fact the lack of threads on how fun it is to die is amazing.

I enjoy claymores. Place them to protect objectives and you're free to leave that objective. They worked great in MAG and COD. Both games offered methods to locate explosives. MAG had the electronics detector and COD had Hacker. Dust has precision scanning and the active scanner which could be changed to detect the db of electronic equipment and explosives on the battlefield.

Yes! Claymores, ahh they remind me of a lot of old times, especially the GOOD call of duty game, cod4 modern warfare.

They are great when you are a sniper, and I love how they used to scare the hell outta you as you turn a corner then BANG! haha.

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.

They would slow down the game for sure but I see that as a good thing. Think before you run.

i approve of proximity mines. they may not be fun when you get killed by them but they are fun to use.

i never hear of anyone saying " ahahaha that ar user shot me what a jolly good time" in fact the lack of threads on how fun it is to die is amazing.

Ok.. I spoke about this before the open demo and now I-¦ll do it again.

How about bringing the classic Claymore into the game?


http://jlz.com/USMC/USMC/ClaymoreMine.jpg

Absof**kinglutely not.


When you include something in a multiplayer game, you have to ensure that it strikes a balance that is fun for both the player on the receiving and the player doing the damage. This is why Forge Guns vs. Dropships is currently broken: All the forge gunner is doing is standing still charging and shooting, and the dropship pilot can't do anything but fly away and lick his wounds (Or suffer a cheap death and the loss of hundreds of thousands of ISK.)


Think about what claymores would add. (Because I can't think of anything.) Now think of how each user would experience them.

The user would simply set them down. That's it, no risk. If he gets a kill, he'll think to himself, "Oh, cool. My claymore got somebody."

The person on the receiving end would be blindsided and awarded a death that they didn't deserve. They'd feel angry, frustrated and cheated.


When you subtract the negative from the positive, ask yourself: Is it worth it? Take your time, but the answer is obvious.

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

The only cool form of claymore would be one that reaveals your position and make some sort of ping on radar.


Classical APM would only be another thing that promotes static gameplay and more camping, Dust certainly don't need that at this stage, no matter what you say.

no thanks claymores take no skill.

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

Did they fix the hidden mines yet?

You already have a reason to use those things: They reveal players, vehicles and equipment more easily. The active scanner is borderline overpowered as it is, but nobody uses it.


And I'd love to hear what new strategy claymores would bring, other than "Face toward enemy" and "Stay away from explody thing."

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.

Absof**kinglutely not.


When you include something in a multiplayer game, you have to ensure that it strikes a balance that is fun for both the player on the receiving and the player doing the damage. This is why Forge Guns vs. Dropships is currently broken: All the forge gunner is doing is standing still charging and shooting, and the dropship pilot can't do anything but fly away and lick his wounds (Or suffer a cheap death and the loss of hundreds of thousands of ISK.)


Think about what claymores would add. (Because I can't think of anything.) Now think of how each user would experience them.

The user would simply set them down. That's it, no risk. If he gets a kill, he'll think to himself, "Oh, cool. My claymore got somebody."

The person on the receiving end would be blindsided and awarded a death that they didn't deserve. They'd feel angry, frustrated and cheated.


When you subtract the negative from the positive, ask yourself: Is it worth it? Take your time, but the answer is obvious.

Anyone have a legitimate argument against mines other than "I'm too stupid/lazy to look where I'm going."

That does about sum it up, I am really starting to think that most of the playerbase really only want to play something they don't need to pay for while helping to ensure that it never really gets a chance to be something.

FPS mechanics are broken as ****, but I'm not getting worn down by that, I'm getting worn down by all of the fuckwits on the forums.

How about no...