View Poll Results: Guys and girls a quick poll about something.
Imo claymores are only useful on Siege to defend the b

27. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, let them go off by trip wire and they should be silently defused if spotted.

    17 62.96%
  • Yes, let them go off by trip wire but they should not be silently defused.

    4 14.81%
  • No, there fine now.

    6 22.22%
  1. #1
    Share this post

  2. #2
    Share this post

  3. #3
    This sounds something that is gong to get "cheap" or "glitched" or otherwise abused in ways not intended for gameplay

    I shall have to think about this.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    But would you like it?
    No offence but imo it's a bit strange to not like an idea before it's even in the game cause it may be glitchy. Isn't it a bit like saying to not make GR3 cause there may be red X's again?
    Share this post

  5. #5
    jchung's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Good idea, except I would prefer it if the mines would be triggered by a motion sensor. That way it could not be defused, or it would be very difficult.
    Share this post

  6. #6
    crtChunk72's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    I'm fine with the idea... there's a mod on PC currently that randomly places trip-wire mines around the existing maps, and if you step on them, you're in trouble... need a Demo guy to place a Demo Charge on the land mine to disable it...

    Since I'm already used to the idea, I don't mind if they make it inherent in the game...
    Share this post

  7. #7
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But would you like it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
    No, now that I thought about it, no.

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">No offence but imo it's a bit strange to not like an idea before it's even in the game cause it may be glitchy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
    Not strange. It is like anticipating that adding an MM1 grenade launcher is a bad idea, and it was.

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Isn't it a bit like saying to not make GR3 cause there may be red X's again? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
    I don't need to comment here.
    Share this post

  8. #8
    If you don't like it that's your choice your right. But what I don't like is someone disliking some thing cause it might be glitchy. What I meant with the example for not making GR3 is that you than could dislike every new thing cause it might not work properly.

    But your reason of thinking it might be cheap is diverent that's arguable.

    I think that if the maps are large enough and have multiple ways to approach diverent areas it wouldn't be cheap. Than it would only pay off to place them near important things so you can't just easely cut off the whole map like in a map like Quarry for example.

    In BF2 you have clays with motion sensors those claymores can be placed virtual everywhere. And with trip-wired ones you could only place them on places where the trip wire can be attached to. So you wouldn't just get blown up if you walk around a corner . But still I'm playing BF2 now for some time and got blown up only a few times by claymores so if the maps are really large I wouldn't worry to much about them.

    Other than that again no offence and I hope we can normally discuss this matter peacefully.
    Share this post

  9. #9
    You know those kinds of "traps" seem to be more like something the vietkong would do, not ghost forces. Kind of like a terrorist only weapon on counter strike.
    Share this post

  10. #10
    cobaka's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    I always thought they used a trip wire, but I was told that they do need to be manually triggered. So, for "realism", I'll vote to keep it that way.
    Share this post