Mines in spawnzone

Archive Suggestions - Archive
1

I don’t mind some witty moves by those, who know the maps pretty good, respect to them.

But it does get frustrating, when some of them know these maps a bit too much well and are able to tell, where the main Spawnpoints (NOT Rallypoints) will be and either place themself there or leave behind Mines, essentially mining the future greyzone.

Shouldn’t the enemy mines be disabled once the greyzone moved? It happens to Rallypoints too, so why not Mines?

Before anyone asks, yes, i fell victim one too many times to these little presents left behind. Nothing frustrates more when you spawn a tank to help push the last cap only to almost instantly blowup.

8 Likes
3

No, mines-its a one of best methods, to stop very fast moving front, or too effective players.
We should have more mines, and also, another traps.

3 Likes
4

So it you are just saying it’s yout skill compensator. That’s not really a good argument. :man_shrugging:

5 Likes
5

Sure.
I am far, from best player of game, but anyway often can win, even if enemy have strong party. Its ok- anyone should have counter, and mines-nice counter to jumping q-e epileptics with low ping.

1 Like
6

I think mines should be activated by both enemies and yout teammates. It’s so lame your whole team can just ignore your overspammed mines.

3 Likes
7

I agree. All kinds of weapons should have friendlyfire.

8

have you played enlisted, one friendly blue on blue bombing run and 15 people would find a new game

9

Stotheg and Player123 liked your comment

10

I don’t think rally mines on enemy spawns is a huge problem, with spawn protection they can’t be too close, and once spawn protection wears off it’s not much different from someone dropping random mines anywhere else on the map.

But AT mines in tank spawns is definitely very abuseable. Perhaps mines should just auto-detonate when they are in the grey zone.

1 Like
11

I mostly agree.

However, I personally consider leaving mines on predictable routes a legit tactic.

4 Likes
12

Grey zones should be removed at all, or moving so far away.
Now grey zones- not more, then abuse sectors for campers.

13

Grey zones are a necessary evil to keep somewhat of a middle ground between camping issue, and spawn camping issue.

14

its bad enough spawning in a rally point and getting shot before you can blink by someone laying prone

15

That’s pretty funny, because that means people knows the map well enough to use niche shite like AT mines to kill few tanks for fun

16

IDK why you go out of your way to shit-talk me on seemingly every post.

Focus on the post and what is being discussed, NOT on the person discussing it.

17

I personally considered it as boring gameplay. That’s why I pretty much never used mines. I think they should be removed from the game from get go.

18

There needs to be a bit of a mid-ground compromise here as far as my opinion goes.

Mines that are placed DIRECTLY on the spawn zones should not persist once the greyzone switches.
However, not ALL mines that are in the greyzone should disappear. There USUALLY aren’t enough to cause an extended issue for attackers that are spawning. A few may go off and kill some troops, but its not like there are 50 mines and you are stepping on every single one.

However, they do serve the niche of getting players to slow down their advance bit which often times will not happen otherwise.

Also please keep in mind that its not like they are renewing these minefields somehow, what is there will be broken through before very long. Otherwise, you will likely try to find an alternate route. Both instances are of the mines doing their job and slowing you down.

Personally I am AGAINST digging trenches for the purpose of AT, so in the case of “trenches shouldn’t be dug where tank spawns are” is kind of oddball situation.

On one hand, I agree that trenches should not be dug where future tank spawns would be. Until there is a function of the shovel that lets you free your tank:

At the very least.

HOWEVER

There is also the issue where trenches in that specific location can be beneficial to prior objectives. I myself dig trenches for a wide variety of reasons:

  • Foxholes
  • rally points
  • barbwire traps
  • AA positions (when they are actually functioning)
  • troop movement
  • etc.

So in any of those instances it may not even be that the person is digging to interfere with future tanks, but rather making use of their current situation.

IN THESE INSTANCES, there needs to be an alternate tank spawn that is activated instead.

1 Like
19

How can you not love the sweet pop of a previously undermined rally point, garnished with a 4-7x multikill? Kinda like hearing the ping of the oven when the food you cooked is finally ready.

Delayed gratification people, delayed gratification.

3 Likes
20

Edging is the name?

21

The counter-argument is that sometimes the attackers have players who are camping the edge of the greyzone (on the defender side), and they are waiting for their teammates to capture the objective.
It’s not uncommon to see stacks who utilize this strategy, and the moment the objective is captured, the teammate on the grey-zone boundary instantly begins rushing to the next objective and it’s not uncommon to see this next objective being captured before the defenders have even had a chance to regroup and/or spawn.

(It’s even worse when paratroopers are factored into the equation, and the attackers instantly deploy on top of the next objective.)

AP and AT mines are a wonderful way to counter the zerg rushers who think they can start capping the point before the defenders have an opportunity to defend.

4 Likes