Jump to content

Land Mine Consumable Module


16 replies to this topic

Poll: Micro land mines module (27 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you want this module?

  1. Yes (14 votes [51.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 51.85%

  2. No (12 votes [44.44%])

    Percentage of vote: 44.44%

  3. Does not matter (1 votes [3.70%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.70%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Vlad Striker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 1,414 posts
  • LocationOld Forest Colony

Posted 26 March 2016 - 12:39 PM

I think it can be consumable module working as dispenser of 30 destructible micromines around mech withing 10-15 meters with 1 point of damage having "friend or foe capability".

#2 Exilyth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 2,100 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 26 March 2016 - 05:38 PM

Actually, we'd just need a certain alternative ammo for LRM: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Thunder_LRM

#3 MasterW3

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 26 posts

Posted 26 March 2016 - 06:02 PM

always thought there should be landmines, (even if you were restricted in ammo to 1 or 2).
I was thinking you could install them in the legs, one each, and it would pant them in the ground, wita tiny thing sticking up, if \it was shot, or stepped on, BOOM!
making it a consumable would be great, means you only get 1.
"everyone, come t the tunnel and plant a mine... "
then go about your business.
or
"everyone, head to base, and plant a mine..."
boom
then shoot them in the legs to kill them.
should almost have to install something in the leg to plant it though.
"Mine Planting Device Required in Leg"

you COULD have it appear on the friendly radar.
and they would hurt ANYONE standing on them.

Edited by MasterW3, 26 March 2016 - 06:03 PM.


#4 KursedVixen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Wolf
  • The Wolf
  • 2,880 posts
  • LocationLook at my Arctic Wolf. Closer... Closer...

Posted 28 March 2016 - 01:26 AM

IS only.

Those leg mounted mines are called A-pods or B-pods which were anti infantry mines designed to stop infantry from attacking the legs of a mech, which since we don't have infantry are worthless in this game.

Edited by KursedVixen, 28 March 2016 - 01:27 AM.


#5 TheArisen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 6,040 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 28 March 2016 - 02:36 AM

I like the idea of adding landmines but I voted no because I'd rather it be Thunder LRM ammo or a weapon that takes up weight. Not a freebie like modules.

#6 Vlad Striker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 1,414 posts
  • LocationOld Forest Colony

Posted 28 March 2016 - 12:34 PM

View PostExilyth, on 26 March 2016 - 05:38 PM, said:

Actually, we'd just need a certain alternative ammo for LRM: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Thunder_LRM

The idea is to make mircomines one-shot-used, not to make rain of mines :)

#7 VinJade

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,211 posts

Posted 29 March 2016 - 01:26 AM

Could always make a different type of LRM Launcher that is dedicated to Thunder Muntion only, weights in at 2 tons(same as an LRM 5) and drops x number of x points of damage mines that is set to go off at the min weight of 20 tons.

give the launcher 25% of the normal rounds that a Standard LRM would have, double or triple the cost of the ammunition and doesn't need a lock to use it and have it predetermined range for the missiles to explode and rain the mines over the field.

though friend and foe are at danger of being damaged.

though some would want it to be a consumable it would be a little off balance since it weights nothing and though kind of expensive it still takes no crits and no weight.

#8 happy mech

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 392 posts

Posted 29 March 2016 - 03:40 AM

things that do damage and do not weigh anything should not exist

#9 KursedVixen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Wolf
  • The Wolf
  • 2,880 posts
  • LocationLook at my Arctic Wolf. Closer... Closer...

Posted 29 March 2016 - 04:58 AM

I agree with happy The Tag laser was originally for spotting for Artillery not LRMs. That was the NARCs job, airstrikes were called in via special vehicles called Aerospace spotters, not mechs. though the idea of an IS specific thunder mine launcher would be cool would give those LRM boats purpose besides being noob tubes,slow computer's mechs.

Still would have to be balanced like detectable with Active probes (which btw contained a Seismic sensor) Along with that how come most of the abilities in the BAP and CAP are in Free weightless modules? that makes the BAp almost worthless. actually they are almost worthless only needed on streak and LRm boats. still should be IS only equipment though.

http://www.sarna.net...le_Active_Probe

BAP,CAP contains the abilities of 2 modules 350 radar retention and Adv. Seismic sensors, along with other sensors like Inferred and such. you can add a BAP but it only provides Less than Half of these functions. it is otherwise useless because the modules are free essentially making the BAP/CAP worthless on anything but missile boats, carrying SSRMs or LRMs.

Why do we have to grind for modules with abilities that the BAP/CAP should have had in the beginning?

Edited by KursedVixen, 29 March 2016 - 05:10 AM.


#10 happy mech

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 392 posts

Posted 29 March 2016 - 05:43 AM

View PostKursedVixen, on 29 March 2016 - 04:58 AM, said:

I agree with happy The Tag laser was originally for spotting for Artillery not LRMs. That was the NARCs job, airstrikes were called in via special vehicles called Aerospace spotters, not mechs. though the idea of an IS specific thunder mine launcher would be cool would give those LRM boats purpose besides being noob tubes,slow computer's mechs.

Still would have to be balanced like detectable with Active probes (which btw contained a Seismic sensor) Along with that how come most of the abilities in the BAP and CAP are in Free weightless modules? that makes the BAp almost worthless. actually they are almost worthless only needed on streak and LRm boats. still should be IS only equipment though.

http://www.sarna.net...le_Active_Probe

BAP,CAP contains the abilities of 2 modules 350 radar retention and Adv. Seismic sensors, along with other sensors like Inferred and such. you can add a BAP but it only provides Less than Half of these functions. it is otherwise useless because the modules are free essentially making the BAP/CAP worthless on anything but missile boats, carrying SSRMs or LRMs.

Why do we have to grind for modules with abilities that the BAP/CAP should have had in the beginning?

exactly, many things were simplified, now they should be revisited, modules scrapped and rethought

#11 VinJade

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,211 posts

Posted 29 March 2016 - 10:22 AM

Vixen, I love LRMs as in the TT I ran a company with a lance of Missile Support mechs back in 3025 and when my unit expanded to a Battalion in 3045 had an entire company of Fire Support mechs that rained hell down upon enemy units(but boy was those long games, lol) so me using LRM support mechs has nothing to do with being a 'noob'

anyways back on topic, I agree TAG was used wrong and they need to revisit everything but you know with their track record and they will ether make them over powered or under powered.

#12 Dee Eight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 6,271 posts

Posted 29 March 2016 - 10:40 AM

A simpler solution to close mech defence would be a version of the B-pods... single shot..hits automatically... does cluster damage like getting an LBX20 at max spread...but it doesn't fit the make believe timeline (wasn't developed until 3068 by Clan Wolf-in-exile).

#13 Vlad Striker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 1,414 posts
  • LocationOld Forest Colony

Posted 29 March 2016 - 10:48 AM

View Posthappy mech, on 29 March 2016 - 03:40 AM, said:

things that do damage and do not weigh anything should not exist

So you want to nullify arty/air strikes?

#14 S_T_R_A_N_G_E

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 36 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 29 March 2016 - 12:57 PM

I like the idea of landmines, but not for damage. I think they could cause damage, but really they should slow down a mech by 25% for 10 seconds and maybe cause 5 damage to the leg that struck them.

They would be much more tactical to play this way, and maybe allow a lighter mech to retreat when being chased.

#15 KursedVixen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Wolf
  • The Wolf
  • 2,880 posts
  • LocationLook at my Arctic Wolf. Closer... Closer...

Posted 29 March 2016 - 01:26 PM

View PostVlad Striker, on 29 March 2016 - 10:48 AM, said:

So you want to nullify arty/air strikes?
no he wants them to have weight so like tag lasers for arty's and such.

#16 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 30 March 2016 - 08:22 AM

Why limit ourselves to just land mines?

Here is my consumable wish list:
  • smoke/chaff rounds - for cover, for blinding the enemy
  • airbursts - increased chance of damage on upper half of mech
  • mines/cluster bombs - increased chance of damage on lower have of mech, area denial
  • sticky incendiaries - massive heat induced on enemy

Edited by Mystere, 30 March 2016 - 08:41 AM.


#17 happy mech

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 392 posts

Posted 30 March 2016 - 12:46 PM

View PostVlad Striker, on 29 March 2016 - 10:48 AM, said:

So you want to nullify arty/air strikes?

yes i want to remove consumables in their current form (both because of being too strong and a p2w aspect)

they can exist if they require certain tonnage, space, match resources and time to get coordinates to use, but i would not add them into game until all other systems are balanced (weapons, existing equipment, mechs, gamemodes)





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users