The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

[vbl]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

The primary purpose of a hand-grenade is obvious, the fact that a support player can use it to blow up commander assets is a convenient side-effect.

It's not hard to figure out what claymores were intended to do, especially on a kit named "sniper."

I understand that it might be easy to "figure out" for someone who always assumes that they're irrevocably right, even among a lot of other very good opinions.

So yea, you got it all worked out. Nice job. The rest of us are probably going to continue talking about it anyway, but thanks for the awesome insights.

[PHPT]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

I understand that it might be easy to "figure out" for someone who always assumes that they're irrevocably right, even among a lot of other very good opinions.

As I said, I'm pretty sure it's either the in-game tutorials or the manual that states that's what they're for too. Might have been something else, like a third-party guide, I can't remember. But I'd be hard-pressed to say snipers were designed to be using them as portable shotguns or being able to seal off bases with them with absolutely no recourse.

I don't see you presenting any counter-arguments, you're simply attacking me. Your "irrevocably right" statement suggests that because I've read your ****ty arguments and still disagree, then I've got some sort of problem. Which would make you "irrevocably right," and your arguments so amazing that no one could possibly look at them and not change their mind.

Cut the ********, please.

[vbl]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

As I said, I'm pretty sure it's either the in-game tutorials or the manual that states that's what they're for too. Might have been something else, like a third-party guide, I can't remember. But I'd be hard-pressed to say snipers were designed to be using them as portable shotguns or being able to seal off bases with them with absolutely no recourse.

I don't see you presenting any counter-arguments, you're simply attacking me. You're doing the exact same thing you're claiming I'm doing, you're saying that if I've read your ****ty arguments and still disagree, then I've got issues.

Evidently, the only acceptable action one can take after reading your arguments is agreeing with you and conceding defeat.

Actually I've been entirely nurturing of all of the opinions in this thread as long as they didn't violate the guidelines. Folks have done good work, and they've even tweaked the "explosions set off claymores" idea to a really elegant level. I think that's cool, and I'm frankly quite pleased that 99% of the people posting have kept this light-hearted and progressive.

As for your other argument, I can't convince you that claymores have a place doing more than just guarding a sniper's back. Regarding your "set off by teammates" idea, I responded in the other thread and that reply represents the full extent of my take on the issue. I'll repaste it here for your convenience:

If teammates detonated claymores for no damage, and that was the ONLY change made, how exactly would it be 2 steps back?

Because they'd be useless. TK or not, claymores placed almost anywhere relevant will get detonated by the incidental teammate - including ones at the tops of ladders.

I don't agree with you guys who maintain that claymores are only "supposed" to be used for back-watching. What you mean to say is, "I think that claymores should only be used for back-watching". No one of us has psychic powers and know what the developers intended (although from their patches, they obviously think that claymores should be used for more than just guarding ladders).

I personally like that Snipers can contribute to the team now, performing a role that very few people bothered with - namely, defense.

Make your change and they (snipers and claymores) get downgraded back into inconsequence for the team.

So no, I will never agree with you if you keep saying the same things over and over. Your solution sacrifices too much and looks completely brutish (and just rehashes a historically bad idea) when compared to some of the compromises that other guys have devised, which balance the claymore AND allow snipers to help the team out more.

[PBJTime]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

A good squad will get more combat performance out of a DAO-armed AT or medic than an engineer, by a long shot. Engineers are basically designed to be riding around in vehicles, or escorting one, their combat ability is mediocre because of it.

Combat performance doesn't dictate how good a kit is. An engie is far from dead weight in skilled hands. Scores don't always show the value of a player or kit. If an engineer keeps a main battle tank healthy and gets a couple repair points while the tank dwindles the opposing team's tickets, you can easily see that it could be a valuable asset to any squad or team. Now imagine if he can safely dearm claymores.

Not to mention, I can do quite well at times as far as combat ability. I actually prefer the pump over the DAO. The trick is to simply lure them closer to you. :) Or you can take them out with the pistol at a good distance which is even more fun. I am far from the only one who can use the engie in combat effectively.

As far as the claymores, they can be used any way deemed fit. I don't recall anything saying they are to be used as defensive weapons only. I know that the anti real life scenario people are going to jump all over this but, "IN REAL LIFE," claymores are "(or were) very often used to setup ambushes. Just because a kit is labeled sniper doesn't mean a sniper shouldn't be able to set up an ambush of sorts with claymores. It is a valid tactic and obviously it is encouraged according to the characteristics after the patch.

[vbl]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

Combat performance doesn't dictate how good a kit is. An engie is far from dead weight in skilled hands. Scores don't always show the value of a player or kit. If an engineer keeps a main battle tank healthy and gets a couple repair points while the tank dwindles the opposing team's tickets, you can easily see that it could be a valuable asset to any squad or team. Now imagine if he can safely dearm claymores.

Not to mention, I can do quite well at times as far as combat ability. I actually prefer the pump over the DAO. The trick is to simply lure them closer to you. :) Or you can take them out with the pistol at a good distance which is even more fun. I am far from the only one who can use the engie in combat effectively.

As far as the claymores, they can be used any way deemed fit. I don't recall anything saying they are to be used as defensive weapons only. I know that the anti real life scenario people are going to jump all over this but, "IN REAL LIFE," claymores are "(or were) very often used to setup ambushes. Just because a kit is labeled sniper doesn't mean a sniper shouldn't be able to set up an ambush of sorts with claymores. It is a valid tactic and obviously it is encouraged according to the characteristics after the patch.

Precisely. All it takes is shifting your vision about what makes a "good squad". And oh, wow, we're also rescuing the engineer kit from near obscurity by giving him an applicable role besides "assisant to tank whore".

[PHPT]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

As for your other argument, I can't convince you that claymores have a place doing more than just guarding a sniper's back.

Mind checking the manual then? I'm not even sure it says it there, but I'm unable to check myself, and it would at least throw that much up in the air.

Personally, I'm fine with claymores being used as traps, you could do that in 1.12 to a degree as long as a teammate didn't step on them. I kept the Zatar Wetlands center flag secure many times by dumping a claymore behind the sandbags. But I see no reason a sloppily-placed claymore should be a threat at all, just like people drive around sloppily-placed AT mines and C4. What really bugs me about it is how it makes it virtually impossible to take many points without either a mandatory death, or the entire capture force consisting of vehicles.

I personally like that Snipers can contribute to the team now, performing a role that very few people bothered with - namely, defense.

You don't need a sniper for that, you could do it with spec ops or even assault just fine. Before you could do mostly the same thing on Sharqi by sitting up a flight of stairs with the M203. The difference with the M203 is that you could still be killed or flashed before you could ever take a shot. The difference with C4 is that either they're nearby watching (hence picked up by UAV and probably shot, not to mention easily-neutralized by a flashbang), or aren't going to be able to set it off until the flag's already neutralized, in which case it's too late for reinforcements.

And performed a role few people bothered with... So it's bad that something can be balanced by being rendered ineffective by bad players, but it's good that something can be used to perform a role exceedingly well because too many bad players don't do it?

Make your change and they (snipers and claymores) get downgraded back into inconsequence for the team.

Snipers are high-efficiency ticket depleters and good defenders, they already had consequence, and had even more when they buffed the rifle accuracy.

If an engineer keeps a main battle tank healthy and gets a couple repair points while the tank dwindles the opposing team's tickets, you can easily see that it could be a valuable asset to any squad or team.

Squads are usually infantry fire teams, when you're doing things like raiding the TV station you usually don't have a tank escorting you in, so the only thing the engineer is bringing is a long sprint bar and a shotgun.

I'm not saying engineers can't be good in combat, I'm saying that they're comparitively weak and bringing one versus several other kits is generally a bad choice.

I know that the anti real life scenario people are going to jump all over this but, "IN REAL LIFE," claymores are "(or were) very often used to setup ambushes.

In real life, something with a "sensitive trigger" that looks like a paperback book mounted on 4 matchsticks wouldn't fare too well against a C4 charge. In real life, you can disarm a claymore with a pistol.

It is a valid tactic and obviously it is encouraged according to the characteristics after the patch.

I wouldn't call reducing the limit of the number out encouraging, nor would I call encouraging servers to set them to FF on with mandatory TK punish, so I'd say those characteristics are in the process of being scaled back.

And oh, wow, we're also rescuing the engineer kit from near obscurity by giving him an applicable role besides "assisant to tank whore".

I wouldn't call claymore insurance an "applicable role." The only other role that's so limited is AT, but there are far more vehicles than there are visible easily-disarmed claymores. Being AT mine insurance is already a not-very-applicable role, because most of the time you don't need it. That's my point, you're basically forcing an abundance of a kit that's poor in combat for a small chance you'll be able to disarm a mine or two. How's that better than a medic that can just revive someone that gets blown up by it again?

The ONLY way it would be better is if engineer had a way of quickly and efficiently disarming them.

[PBJTime]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

Mind checking the manual then? I'm not even sure it says it there, but I'm unable to check myself, and it would at least throw that much up in the air.

Manual and Prima Official Game Guide in hand...

The only thing the manual states about claymores is in the description of the sniper kit: "In addition to the sniper rifle, this kit is also equipped with claymore mines. The claymore trigger can be sensitive, so be sure to plant the mine and then get out of the way in a hurry." (Kinda funny in retrospect)

Prima Guide: In the Sniper Tester Tips section it has much to say about claymores so I'll break it down. It does indeed suggest to place claymores around the perimeter of your desired sniping position as well as ladders and building entry points, etc. It then goes on to say claymores are great to cover entrances that enemy infantry may use to assault the flag. "Place them at angles/locations where the enemy will trigger them unknowingly..." Lasty, it says claymores make good booby traps for vehicles.

So theres that.

Squads are usually infantry fire teams, when you're doing things like raiding the TV station you usually don't have a tank escorting you in, so the only thing the engineer is bringing is a long sprint bar and a shotgun.

Usually being the key word. Not every map has a TV station you must go into. If the "only" thing I bring into a close quarters battle in a TV station raid is a pump shotgun, I say I'm in good shape. I was actually thinking more along the lines of karkand or wake when I stated what I did. I'll grant you an engie may not always be the best but they can always be effective given the right person.

I'm not saying engineers can't be good in combat, I'm saying that they're comparitively weak and bringing one versus several other kits is generally a bad choice.

Again, combat effectiveness is not the sole factor in importance. What they lack in combat effectiveness (relatively speaking), they make up for in other areas. Diffusing AT mines being yet another example of something that helps my team daily.

In real life, something with a "sensitive trigger" that looks like a paperback book mounted on 4 matchsticks wouldn't fare too well against a C4 charge. In real life, you can disarm a claymore with a pistol.

Ok, I only brought this up to verify the validity of the tactic...nothing else. Surprisingly as it may seem, real life tactics can be and often are implemented in-game.

I wouldn't call reducing the limit of the number out encouraging, so clearly they're still trying to figure out exactly what to do with them right now.

No, but the fact that they no longer tk or can be blown up could be interpreted as encouraging. They reduced the limit to keep it in check.

[Rambo]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

I know its not real and the thought shocks me but friendly fire on mines and clays should be turned of because it is so much more fun that way especially with the punish system,was 1.2 turned off i rem one patch it was turned off or was that another glitch :p but it made it fun at the time

but personally im pretty good at spotting clays/mines both ours and thiers so i dont get TK`s:salute:

[PHPT]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

No, but the fact that they no longer tk or can be blown up could be interpreted as encouraging. They reduced the limit to keep it in check.

As said in the edit, they also encouraged servers to turn mine FF on, and made TK punish mandatory. So far that's two strikes against the revamped claymores, so the current direction, if anything, is nerf.

[Rambo]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

oh yes also u should be able to shoot them also with any gun inc pistol and detonate them its just stupid u cant imagine the enemy putting a clay down and support fire blows him up that would be great(but friendly fire still off too)

[[MyIS]Spetsnaz]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

oh yes also u should be able to shoot them also with any gun inc pistol and detonate them its just stupid u cant imagine the enemy putting a clay down and support fire blows him up that would be great(but friendly fire still off too)

This would essentially render them useless. Why aren't you suggesting that they do the same for C4? It fits the same logic, no?

As I mentioned above, the best solution (imo) is to allow claymores to be disabled by C4, Artillery and wrenches only. This way a commander's artillery strike will have more purpose other than randomly killing people and specops soldiers (a common class) can disable claymores as an added ability by C4ing them.

[Rambo]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

i didnt think c4 can be blown up by shooting it or even burning it??

[[MyIS]Spetsnaz]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

i didnt think c4 can be blown up by shooting it or even burning it??

Disabling is the key here, not "blowing up".

[TheEndofWar]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

I think if any adjustment should be made it is that engineers can approach a claymore while prone from any direction and disarm it. It should take twice as long as a mine, because in real life an AT mine* can just be picked up and moved whereas to disarm a claymore with a trip wire or a motion detection (google IED in Iraq) would take some care and time.

*(anti-tank mines which are pressure sensitive or triggered by magnetic fields.)

Hell I say even give them a point, it might get them out of the tanks!

[zipp0r]

Re: The Claymore Workshop: New Ideas Required

How about:

Only engineers can can crawl towards a claymore and disarm it from any angle.
Claymores still linger for 2 deaths like C4 and AT mines. Engineer gets one point for disarming mine or gets one mine added to his kit (unless he has a full set still).

there are 3 angles to disarm a claymore from, why add a fourth one which defeats the claymores purpose ?
the majority of the time a claymore will be placed where at least 2 angles are available for it to be defused.
the fact that a person wants to be able to defuse it from its detonation angle says that they just want to nerf it cos the majority of the time a clay kills them.

ps claymores "linger" for ~15-30seconds after death, disapearing shortly after the kit bag disapears.