For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

[imported_Remmydox]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

I didn't quite understand this thread :/

[Kayback]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

Scarz, there is nothing even remotely classified about Claymore danger zones. You can look them up in about a dozen different books and at least a hundred different places in the Internet.

And yes they are a hell of a lot more dangerous than the game makes them out to be.

But so are a lot of other things.

Claymores are easily recognisable, and they are fun things to have in the game.

As you should know, the Bouncing Betty, at least the original ones, relied on being burried in the ground to work, otherwise people will simply walk past them.

While there are many other ways of setting a 'Betty up, they are all akin to stringing a grenade in a tube across a doorway. Not the worlds most effective thing ever.

[imported_Scarz]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

First off, if you want to argue realism, you're playing the wrong game. There's a whole laundry list of things unrealistic about BF2, the easiest of which is that I can undo a .50-cal bullet wound to the head with defibrilators.

Second, if you want to argue a trigger, you can hook a claymore up to practically anything, including vibration and infrared sensors.

uh-huh, hmmm, interesting. First off, my intention was not argue all the unrealistic things in this game, only this one and I thought that my argument would be valid.

Secondly, how do you know about vibration sensors and infrared? What exactly are your credentials? I'm not necessarily calling you an idiot because yes, if there is a blasting cap in the cap-well, and some sort of power source to trigger it you could theoretically set it off with anything from a garage door opener to a cell phone.

But, modern militaries do not utilize "McGyver-rigged" explosives or expensive high-tech gadgets. They just do it the old fashioned way. Take it from a guy who has actually initiated real claymores before.

Lastly, everyone seems to be missing the point... Replace the claymore with the bouncing betty because it would be a lot more realistic thus making the game more entertaining without sacrificing game intensity or changing the current game strategies for using the claymore. Plus I think it would just be cooler.

But, you know what? I'm tired of bickering back and forth with a bunch of computer nerds who think they know what they're talking about on the grounds that they go to websites containing information deemed by the administrators to be "For informational purposes only". You people are almost laughable.

[Eden]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

Remind me. Bouncing Betty's are those mines that "bounce" high enough to blow your reproductive organs to bits but not kill you?

[baggygreen]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

i believe so.. oucch

[imported_Scarz]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

Remind me. Bouncing Betty's are those mines that "bounce" high enough to blow your reproductive organs to bits but not kill you?

yep. Thats the one. Picture it... the sweet chaos of the animation... :evil:

[RingPirate]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

Yeah why not replace claymores by bouncing bettys but really who cares. The only people who are going to notice are poeple like the OP anyways. I understand the thought behind it, start a patition or a poll here on the forum and send it to EA, maybe they'll change it although I doubt it. Plus you (OP) should be a little less aggressive towards others here. It's your I'm right your wrong attitude that annoys. Plus although the US joined the geneva confention it's still critizised for droping bombs (spray bombs , don't know the english word) that don't hit anything lay in the field and wait for some little kid to walk over it. And lastley coming from an American I find that quite amusing (not because you would not know what the letters stand for without looking'em up on Wikipedia?)

One more thing, without looking it up on wikipedia, do you even know what NATO stands for?

[Holle]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

BFV had bouncing bettys. You might want to check that out.

[imported_Phenomenomenon]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

No one is complaining about claymores because of realism related issues. It's about game play.

[NUTZ_J98]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

Second, if you want to argue a trigger, you can hook a claymore up to practically anything, including vibration and infrared sensors.

I was gonna say the same thing. Claymores can be detonated by movement with the correct equipment. But if you want to go on about just the realism there are alot of more important things to consider than the quick deploy trip claymore in the game.

This has been gone over numerous times and the same element comes to light every time. If they made everything 100% realistic then nobody would play the game because war is not fun. So work on the things that make the game suck and not the ones that itch your back because "it can't happen".

[=IMO=THJones]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

First of all, yes I use claymores. Secondly, yes I hate claymore whores. This is the second most unrealistic element in BF2, aside from engineers repairing stuff from inside vehicles but I wont get into that.

Here's how a claymore works...

BY THE WAY, I was a combat engineer in the 10th Mountain Division for 4 years and have actual combat experience, so dont bother arguing with me about my descriptions because you would already be wrong.

Anyway, a claymore doesn't just go off by itself. It has to have a blasting cap screwed into it with an electrical transmission line running to a handheld "clacker". You depress the handle on the clacker, it creates electricity that sets off the cap and detonates the mine. This practice of dropping claymores wherever and running off to the other side of the map is so ridiculous!

Not only that, but claymores are a bunch of steel ball bearings stuck to about 2 1/2 pounds of C4 encased in a plastic sheath... THEY DONT JUST KILL THE GUY TWO FEET AWAY FROM THEM. The actual kill radious is supposedly classified but it's a helluva lot more than two feet.

Anyway, the point of my rant is this: Who's ever heard of the BOUNCING BETTY? Pretty much anybody who's ever watched a war movie, right? Well, guess what? IRL they have almost all the characteristics of a BF2 claymore. They have pressure prongs for stepping on them, but are also tilt-activated so you can rig them with tripwires as well to cover a larger area.

I think replacing the Claymore with the Bouncing Betty would pretty much silence the discussion about them BECAUSE AT LEAST IT WOULD BE HALF-ASS REALISTIC. And not only that... but think of the kick-ass animation of a Betty popping out of the ground to about waist level and blowing a dude apart? :p

claymores aren't really classified, from sides to front: killing range is 30 yds injury range 100 yds to the rear killing 20 yds possible injury 50 yds
claymores are click and boom but can be set up with trip wires.
personally i think the real anser is to make them click and boom like the c4.

i like the betties idea would be great if they gave them to engy class.

they need to make all explosives destructible and ff on again.

[fatLUNCH]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

Does the millatary still use bouncing bettys ?
I thought thos went out with Vietnam?

no... but when i went through AIT for COMBAT ENGINEER back in 1997 we actually trained to remove these types of mines... they are freaking crazy.!!!

[BravoTwoZeroUK]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

Can't claymores be activated by tripwires?
Never actually came in contact with claymores in real life.
I think in Vietcong2 they had booby traps on MP? Where the enemy had to trip the wire to set it off.
I've said in another thread that we should have claymores like they had in Ghost Recon setting them off using a clacker.

[sknight]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

claymores aren't really classified, from sides to front: killing range is 30 yds injury range 100 yds to the rear killing 20 yds possible injury 50 yds
claymores are click and boom but can be set up with trip wires.
personally i think the real anser is to make them click and boom like the c4.

i like the betties idea would be great if they gave them to engy class.

they need to make all explosives destructible and ff on again.

geez...100 yds?! That's HUGE. I suppose in a dense jungle you'd be okay, but if everyone within 100yds of a claymore was injured! Anyone know the "injury range" of a hand grenade? 100yds seems rather large to me.

[Jade Falcon]

Re: For realism, switch claymores to bouncing bettys!

Regarding the Geneva Conventions, from what I've heard (though i freely admit I may be wrong), the US never signed up to the Geneva Conventions, but chooses to follow them, basically out of some sort of convenience and sense of 'fair play', for lack of a better phrase, but at the same time it means at any time it can choose to withdraw.