The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

[Batausu]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

The point is, make placing claymores a skill. Surely you can place it somewhere not in plane view, but still blocking the way.
If the enemy can see it, should be able to disarm it, without getting behind, like it is now. Simply spot it and go strait to it with the wrench. It's a compromise, I know, but it rewards skill: both placing and spotting.

[CaptJordus]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

The point is, make placing claymores a skill.

I really hate reading comments like this.

The problem isnt having the talent to drop osmething at your feet

The problem lies in it not being surmountable in its current state, no matter how well you play.

You shouldnt need a 4 year degree to be able to play a PC game, but you also shouldnt run around clicking a "win" button that just ends the round with you at #1 every time, either.

[IntensivCareBear]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

well jordus, my 5 second deploying time in which you must be prone and stationary fixes it.

then the engineer can take 5 seconds prone removing them. its equal, except snipers would only be able to have 1, otherwise there are too many out there, and everyone would have to be engineer

that way i can knife snipers while theyre deploying claymores, better than them hopping around dropping them in my base.

and lay off the harshness jordan, theyre stupid comments but you dont need to make another stupid comment about how they are stupid.

[CaptJordus]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

Its not a stupid comment.

Its silly that everyone thinks you need a manual 500 pages thick to learn how to operate the game.

It ranks up there with such stupid ideas as requiring key combinations to reload each different type of weapon.

Its ridiculous stuff like that, that detracts from the game itself.

Claymores dont take any talent to use, they never did. The problem is they were not idiot proof enough in the beginning, which lead to too many TKs. Now they ARE idiot proof, which leads to them being whored.

[Batausu]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

I totally agree, claymores are in need of some change. This is why I came with the idea of making claymores diffusible only after spotting, but without the need to approach it from behind, like it is now. Placing claymores in places hard to spot needs to become a skill, same as spotting. Everybody is in motion now and hardly notice a claymore, unless it is in the open.
The same is in real life, you can't disarm a claymore without seeing it first, right?
But after you spotted it, should be easier to disarm then it is now.
So why don't you like the idea of using a little thinking when placing a claymore? Don’t just throw it on your feet and leave. Use it wisely. And you don't need a manual to use your head, do you?

[PBJTime]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

THAT BEING SAID...that idea would have to go hand in hand with this idea...the sniper class should only be allowed one claymore per death....claymores in real life do not have motion sensors...they have either trip wires or MORE comonly the clacker....whick is either connected to a wire or transmitted by handheld to the forward observation post in any small army squad....

so i think the sniper should have to detonate it manually via a special forces like detonator...this would eliminate essentially "fire and forget missles" and claymore spam...

A problem I can see with this is the fact that, in this game, the general consensus is that the claymores are "meant" to be used to protect a sniper's back while he's scoping in on something or whatever. A clacker would leave a sniper very vulnerable. They are already next to useless at close range so I think they still need the "automatic" claymores. Lastly, not that real life has any real bearing on all this but, claymores can be fitted with infrared, acoustic, or vibration sensors, among many others.

I do agree with engies having the ability to crawl up to them to disarm them as well as hit points. Very good ideas there.

[Jemme101]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

When I put a claymore down you wont be able to spot it or get behind it. So there goes your theory of disarming or shooting/blowing it up.

[triumph]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

Clacker clacker clacker. Click one clacker more to make claymore one go boom, and do the same for a second claymore. BFV i feel did something almost right so why ea messed with it i dunno. If a player isn't paying enough attention (see n00b going moo while looking at the purdy flashes in his/her scope) than the claymore never gets to go boom, gg sniper n00b.

[[MyIS]Spetsnaz]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

I play sniper religiously.. it's the only class I play and have usually played.

So here are my recommendations.

What: When switching to claymore mines in the kit, it will take longer to switch. An longer animation would do, perhaps?
Why: To often when in a close quarters engagement I can easily hop around and place a claymore right before I get shot. This is of course screws the person shooting because, unless they can headshot me instantly, they'll be dead too.

What: Players should be able to disable their own claymores.
Why: Unlike many snipers, I dont rack up a huge death count. My kd is usually 3:1 or atleast 2:1 (unless its a bad round for me). For that reason, 2 claymores simply isn't enough for me. I can setup some defences, defend the flag, pick up my claymores and move on. It keeps the sniper mobile and adds a little more depth to the class with little or no expense to gameplay balance.

What: Despite Variable's contradictive nature in asking us what we think but telling us not to think certain things, I believe that only heavy projectiles should eliminate claymores. An artillery bombardment should eliminate the presence of claymores completely. It would give the artillery some value.
Why: How often have you came to a flag that is enclosed by only 2 entrances, that were both covered by claymores? Such a situation is stupid because unless a player is an engineer (even that doesnt matter if you cant get behind the claymores) the player has absolutely NOTHING they can do about it. That is, of course, completely wrong. Players should have something could do about it. So C4 and Artillery should eliminate claymores. Everything else should not because those weapons are fired consistently all round in random places. Artillery needs to be placed and so does C4.

[vbl]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

Despite Variable's contradictive nature in asking us what we think but telling us not to think certain things...

I asked you to think and comment, but not suggest things that have already been unsuccessfully tried - it's a very reasonable request. Every discussion about claymores degrades into the same whinefest about "how it used to be" and it gets us nowhere. "How it used to be" didn't work. So, I provided some ground rules for the discussion and the rest of the gang has done a sterling job. We've got some great ideas floating around now.

I'm sorry if the intent of my original post was confusing for you; everyone else has managed to understand why I established a few guidelines, so I'm not sure what to say.

[Alcorr]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

claymore should be able to be disarmed by well placed shots, and I mean well placed

Thats a good idea, so is this:

Claymores do not detonate as long as enemy players are prone and crawling when they're within the trigger area. Engineers can still disarm claymores as usual.

[[MyIS]Spetsnaz]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

I asked you to think and comment, but not suggest things that have already been unsuccessfully tried - it's a very reasonable request. Every discussion about claymores degrades into the same whinefest about "how it used to be" and it gets us nowhere. "How it used to be" didn't work. So, I provided some ground rules for the discussion and the rest of the gang has done a sterling job. We've got some great ideas floating around now.

I'm sorry if my original post was confusing for you; everyone else has managed to understand why I established a few guidelines, so I'm not sure what to say.

I see what you're trying to say, but you cannot contend with the fact that there are situations where disabling a claymore is impossible. Event if you have an engineer that can crawl his way to the claymore, in a fast paced game like BF2 that would be impractical -- not to mention the engineer isn't played by many because it isn't the best class to get kills with.

The idea is to create a situation where 1 weapon dominates and cannot be fought. You should always be able to fight something, whether it be a tank, helo, aircraft, etc.

The reason most people get angry with certain weapons is because they have no control over whether or not they die (which is why we get all the complaints about AA, M203/GP30 and now Claymores).

Allowing every player to disable a claymore is impractical, but increasing the possibilities of disabling a claymore is a viable solution in my opinion and regardless of the guidelines you set, it's impossible to avoid the issue -- because it is an issue right now. Trust me, I can go an entire round using nothing but claymores and get in the top 3. There's something wrong with that...

[Arkasha]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

Here's a thought: make the claymores put out a "line" which extends from the front of it to the nearest permanent object, like a tripwire.

The speed with which you move is inversely related to your ability to spot the wire (that is, run like hell, you likely won't see the wire, you go boom. If you walk slowly or crawl or go prone and crawl, you move more slowly, and have a much higher spotting %.) You don't ever have 100% spotting ability, but it can range from, say, 2% to 95%.

Once you've spotted the wire, disarming is simple. You can use your knife or something (a tool everyone has) and disconnect the wire, or otherwise defuse the claymore.

Add this notion to the one requiring a 5-sec setup time, and it might work well. My system makes enemies trade speed for vision. You can either gallop through and hope to God you don't trip a wire, or take your time, and risk being shot at and maybe killed.

[Alcorr]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

I see what you're trying to say, but you cannot contend with the fact that there are situations where disabling a claymore is impossible. Event if you have an engineer that can crawl his way to the claymore, in a fast paced game like BF2 that would be impractical -- not to mention the engineer isn't played by many because it isn't the best class to get kills with.

The idea is to create a situation where 1 weapon tes and cannot be fought. You should always be able to fight something, whether it be a tank, helo, aircraft, etc.

The reason most people get angry with certain weapons is because they have no control over whether or not they die (which is why we get all the complaints about AA, M203/GP30 and now Claymores).

Allowing every player to disable a claymore is impractical, but increasing the possibilities of disabling a claymore is a viable solution in my opinion and regardless of the guidelines you set, it's impossible to avoid the issue -- because it is an issue right now. Trust me, I can go an entire round using nothing but claymores and get in the top 3. There's something wrong with that...

What he said ^^^^

Have any of you guys ever thought about the tower in ghost town?

Sniper + support + medic = invincible...

Sniper claymores ladders...support keeps supplied and medic keeps alive....

The commander can't arty and if you can't kill claymores with explosives then....like I said...invincible.

[vbl]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

*long lecture about stuff we already know*

Trust me, I can go an entire round using nothing but claymores and get in the top 3. There's something wrong with that...

We know there's something wrong with it - that's why I made a thread and that's why we're all contributing to it.

We've introduced a good number of changes that, taken singly or combined, will help temper the 1.2 claymore without making it useless. We don't know what is feasible or not feasible from a coding standpoint, but we'll obviously have to leave that to DICE. In the meantime we can noodle over some new ideas.