1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

[PHPT]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

If you're talking about the old solution where any explosion set them off, then no. We've dismissed that as a broad solution multiple times now, and we know that almost nobody used claymores when such a feature was in effect.

No one used them because they were a guaranteed teamkill, which had NOTHING to do with their destroyability.

Snipers already have a disadvantage at close combat. NO nades, no assault rifle. What more do you want? Snipers cannot get that high of a score compared to Planes,helis, and tanks and other infantry.

They have a disadvantage so they should be able to do the same exact thing they nerfed Spec Ops over?

You're a sniper, you're not supposed to be a close-range combattant.

[[MyIS]Spetsnaz]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

Great, Spetsnatz. You're a part of the problem, not the solution. So why do you try to offer a solution when you take advantage of this all the time?

EDIT: Refer to this great and popular article the describes my position on having fun in-game:

http://www.sirlin.net/Features/feature_PlayToWinPart1.htm

Because I play to win. If placing a ton of claymores allows my team to win, I will do just that. I'll probably get verbally castrated for saying that, however it's the bare truth of gaming -- many players (like myself) play to win.

This is why I have no problem with spawn camping (whether I'm on the recieving end or not).

The entire purpose of a game is to provide challenge that you can overcome. The great thing about multiplayer gaming is that humans can devise very sneaky ways to beat you and, apparently, many people do not like losing.

I rarely ever game claymored because I know how and when to expect a claymore. In truth, I could live with claymores they way they are now. I could live with C4 chucking and PKMs. Unlike yourself, however, I realize that everyone isn't like me and some people play the game just for the roleplaying experience of running around a virtual world and using military tactics. Thus, I post a suggestion to limit things.

The ideas presented for fixing claymores are awesome, to say the least. My only concern is that alot of them do not seem very practical and easy to understand (there needs to be some logic in the game, not reality.. just a sprinkle of logic here or there).

Since you went there, I'd like to make a recommendation to players that get swamped with claymores:

Outsmart your opponent. If you see they are placing claymores in a specific spot, go somewhere else. There is always a gap in the defenses that is ready to be exploited by your forces -- you just need to find it. If a flag is completely consumed with claymores, skip it and move on to another flag.

Simply assuming people won't use something because it isnt "fair" is naive, at best. For instance, note the influx of PKM support kits on city maps. I have no problem with them (though I do see why people do have a problem). Instead, I found the weakness the PKM players have and use it against them.

[zacman13245]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

i dont mind the claymores much. guess its just me

[[MyIS]Spetsnaz]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

Oh great another person complaining that snipers have too many claymores. You take away my claymores then take away grenades also. Snipers already have a disadvantage at close combat. NO nades, no assault rifle. What more do you want? Snipers cannot get that high of a score compared to Planes,helis, and tanks and other infantry. So You guys just beeyotch about it because they can lay claymores by flags and you cant throw your grenade blindly and blow it up. What a bunch of sissy little cry babies saying "ITS NOT FAIR"..

Dont refer to snipers as someone other than me.. it's the only class I play, and I'm happy to say that I dominate most of the time (albeit those crappy nights we all have, heh).

Regretfully, you have casually ignored my examples and simply called me a sissy -- which only goes to show that you feel that you are at a disadvantage without 2 claymores -- which only goes to show you need more practice.

[PHPT]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

EDIT: Refer to this great and popular article the describes my position on having fun in-game:
http://www.sirlin.net/Features/featu...ToWinPart1.htm

Sorry, but I gotta call BS. I'm sick of seeing that article being posted because it has almost no relevance to a game where balance is periodically changed, and ESPECIALLY not in a discussion over what needs to be changed.

The article says that if you're saying "I'm sick of this overpowered crap" then you need to shut up and either use it or work around it.
Balancing says that when people are sick of overpowered crap, it needs to be changed.

[imported_RpTheHotrod]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

Snipers are already almost useless compared to other classes. Doing this would just make them even more useless.


Just have a max of 2 claymores...period...ever. Meaning, if you lay 2 claymores, then that's it. If you die and try to put anymore, the others vanish. Always 2, no matter what. No matter how many suicides, deaths, or re-supply bags.....only 2 can be placed at any given moment.

Perhaps a better balance would let snipers "difuse" enemy claymores. This would also add a benefit for a sniper being in your squad.

[Mekstizzle]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

Good original post. Limiting claymores to 1 would make it so snipers would only use them for covering their own arse...

Another good idea someone said was to make them detonate by freindly but not kill said freindly troop. This would eliminate the annoying tk punish, as well as force snipers to use them wisely. People would still use claymores. Just this time - god forbid - they would have to, use their brains?!?! No freaking way??? Just like now they can't dolphin dive and shoot and jump? BF2 is becoming a game where you use your brain??? NOOOOO

Everysingle BF2 player: ''n00b patch''

>_>

Use your ****ing brains once in a while. If you wan't mindless **** then go play CSS. No ironsights, no prone. Just run and gun. There are even one shot kill weapons...hurray!

[PBJTime]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

Good original post. Limiting claymores to 1 would make it so snipers would only use them for covering their own arse...

Another good idea someone said was to make them detonate by freindly but not kill said freindly troop. This would eliminate the annoying tk punish, as well as force snipers to use them wisely. People would still use claymores. Just this time - god forbid - they would have to, use their brains?!?! No freaking way??? Just like now they can't dolphin dive and shoot and jump? BF2 is becoming a game where you use your brain??? NOOOOO

Everysingle BF2 player: ''n00b patch''

>_>

Use your ****ing brains once in a while. If you wan't mindless **** then go play CSS. No ironsights, no prone. Just run and gun. There are even one shot kill weapons...hurray!

First, covering a sniper's back is not the sole purpose of a claymore. I wish I knew who started this vicious lie. :evil:

Secondly, there are no brains or skills required when setting claymores...there never was and never will be. A monkey could figure out that it is wise to set claymores in well traveled areas. In this game, if your enemy travels it, so does your team so claymores would be useless again if your team could trigger them. The only place you could set them would be where nobody goes so what would be the point? It was never about "skill" or "brains" setting claymores...simply the brains of your team not to run into them. Anybody who says that FF (or the FF without a score penalty) would mean you had to use your brain to set claymores is mistaken. The only choice you have to make is to put them in a well traveled area or not and then hope to god people on your team are smart enough to avoid them.

[IntensivCareBear]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

If you're talking about the old solution where any explosion set them off, then no. We've dismissed that as a broad solution multiple times now, and we know that almost nobody used claymores when such a feature was in effect.

you see variable, the problem with your mini solutions is that they turn BF2 into a game that is entirely based around dropping and defusing claymores.

the game is not supposed to be that you have to be prone and engineer class to safely go around corners, bushes, flags ANYTHING!

i dont care HOW dice nerfs them, but they BETTER nerf them.

the starter of this thread must be a pretty damn good sniper, because 100 percent of the ones i have seen have had claymores as 90 percent of their kills.

on great wall i switched to sniper cause i was commander and was shocked by how pathetically easy it is to rack up kills with the rifle.

you aim.... click.... they die.

unfortunately, because most snipers suck so much they miss,get knifed, get shot by pkms, get hit with hand grenades, and go on totalbf2 to whine about this.

1 sniper, 1 claymore is a good idea. however, more is needed, because 1 free kill is 1 too many free kills.

Oh great another person complaining that snipers have too many claymores. You take away my claymores then take away grenades also. Snipers already have a disadvantage at close combat. NO nades, no assault rifle. What more do you want? Snipers cannot get that high of a score compared to Planes,helis, and tanks and other infantry. So You guys just beeyotch about it because they can lay claymores by flags and you cant throw your grenade blindly and blow it up. What a bunch of sissy little cry babies saying "ITS NOT FAIR"..

a perfect example of a moron sniper. do you want an ak 101 for close combat too loser? you already have magical invincible claymores!

all of the snipers i knife have been aware of me for 10 seconds, usually as im running toward them.

would they get out their own knife and level the playin field? no, they suck so much they just die.

losers like this poster make me sick.

[[MyIS]Spetsnaz]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

Snipers are already almost useless compared to other classes. Doing this would just make them even more useless.

Could you then tell me why the great snipers that I play with (those that have taught me alot about how to play sniper right) can get up to 100 points while everyone else trails at 20-30 points? These snipers and myself (to an extent) can absolutely dominate a server .

Snipers aren't useless at all, it just takes much more thought to play as a sniper.

[AlphaNut]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

Could you then tell me why the great snipers that I play with (those that have taught me alot about how to play sniper right) can get up to 100 points while everyone else trails at 20-30 points? These snipers and myself (to an extent) can absolutely dominate a server .

Snipers aren't useless at all, it just takes much more thought to play as a sniper.

Very well said mate

I don't mind if they take away our claymores. All those running chicken will still get their heads popped. Regardless whether they run into a clay, or step infront of my scope. Either way, their death will be quick and painless

[zipp0r]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

Good original post. Limiting claymores to 1 would make it so snipers would only use them for covering their own arse...

Another good idea someone said was to make them detonate by freindly but not kill said freindly troop. This would eliminate the annoying tk punish, as well as force snipers to use them wisely. People would still use claymores. Just this time - god forbid - they would have to, use their brains?!?! No freaking way??? Just like now they can't dolphin dive and shoot and jump? BF2 is becoming a game where you use your brain??? NOOOOO

Everysingle BF2 player: ''n00b patch''

>_>

Use your ****ing brains once in a while. If you wan't mindless **** then go play CSS. No ironsights, no prone. Just run and gun. There are even one shot kill weapons...hurray!

and once that one claymore is used up by a guy coming up the ladder you set a trap on, he comes back to get u and theres not alot you can do about it.
you lot are all wanting it nerfed more just because you play karkand and get blown up in the alleyways. when strike at n00bkand comes on when im playing, you'll NEVER see me in those alleyways. i go down the sides of the map, use tanks/apc's, hmmv's and goto all the other flags, as the first flag is the stupidest one to get first... if you die in that area 10-20times per round, dont you ever think to yourself "im a retard for fighting a pointless battle here" ? if you dont... then you should!! :laugh:

[BigBadBob]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

isn't the point to keep the enemy from taking the flag?

[exho]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

I think its a good idea, I mean why not EA has given everything else a try

[lamah]

Re: 1 Claymore per sniper -- plausible?

Testing

****