Decoys/Traps etc.

Spartan · Post by **Spartan** » 2005-05-31 03:32

I was thinking that perhaps something else that could add a strategic/realistic edge to this game would be various decoys and traps.

This might prove too complicated, but perhaps a certain class would be able to rig dead bodies etc. with explosives. Some people might not be able to resist the sight of an engineer's corpse with his shiny new jackhammer just begging to be picked up....but..well. The subsequent explosion could be considered as a little bit of chlorine in the gene pool. Obviously I'm not entirely sure of specifics, but I think that the general principle is sound; the defensive force should have the option of setting traps which look like desirable items to the opposition. Even if people are wise to these tricks, an EOD (think thats right) team would need to be sent in to remove the obstacle, and they would make nice big targets for snipers.

Does no one else think that the teamwork involved in having to remove these obstacles would make for great gameplay? As well as the inevitable moments when you seem someone running towards the trap and you dont even have time to finish the word "Don't" before you see his helpless ragdoll corpse go spiraling through the air....

Secondly. Decoys to mislead artillery.
I have no idea how much this is used in modern conflicts, but must admit that it was inspired largely by world war 2 tactics. If we can set up fake vehicles etc. that look like juicy targets from a distance, but are obviously fake when viewed from up close...well....there's a chance that the commander might waste one of his valuable artillery bombardments. This would also create a greater need for snipers/scouts who could be asked to go and take a closer look at a target before the commander makes his decision.

apologies for the length of this post.

-Spartan-

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2005-05-31 03:52

EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) is correct, yes.

BFV did this to an extent; one of the NVA/VC engineer kits was able to boobytrap vehicles.

As for boobytrapping bodies, not sure, as they eventually disappear. Things like supply caches (ammunition boxes, medical kits, etc.) could be boobytraps, definitely. We've discussed before and would like to do this, and it has been done in one mod already, I think.

Beckwith · Post by **Beckwith** » 2005-05-31 03:54

i think it would be cool to give US spec ops the ability to make boobytraps considering i believe there trained to do this in real life, (this might be a touchy subject) but give MEC spec ops ability to lay IED's, then give engineer kits something like wire cutters or something like that to defuse them

also DCR had the suicide bomber pick up kits those were neat to

Spartan · Post by **Spartan** » 2005-05-31 04:01

Indeed.

I was thinking of it more in terms of an MEC/Chinese ability, especially as boobytrapping a dead body (though obviously this wont be implemented) is far from standard operating procedure.....

I think that steering clear of anything to do with terrorists is probably a good idea, as it would be unfortunate to further reinforce the fallacy that middle eastern armies are the same as terrorists.

A Terrorist faction on the other hand....now that would be interesting. Fighting on loosely the same side as the MEC, but with less advanced weaponry, suicide bomber tactics and without any air force to speak of.....question is, would anyone actually want to play as them?

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2005-05-31 04:09

Beckwith wrote:i think it would be cool to give US spec ops the ability to make boobytraps considering i believe there trained to do this in real life, (this might be a touchy subject) but give MEC spec ops ability to lay IED's, then give engineer kits something like wire cutters or something like that to defuse them

also DCR had the suicide bomber pick up kits those were neat to

The MEC in BF2 seems to be treated as a conventional army rather than a guerilla force. If on a map where one of the factions is a guerilla force, then IEDs made from contrived or conventional munitions could be used, yes.

Spartan, in regards to your suggestion about decoys, yes, tank and vehicle decoys are actually still in Army Combat Engineer inventory. However, putting them in a kit isn't really realistic as they're not man-portable; they'd have to be mounted on a truck. They're not really used much anymore because of advanced optics, though.

Spartan · Post by **Spartan** » 2005-05-31 04:15

ah fair enough, I thought that the idea seemed a little....outdated.

Still, I think it would be interesting to limit the usefulness/accuracy of the intel that the commander can gather on his own, so that he would need to work in cooperation with others who could be his "eyes and ears" on the ground, as it were.

Again, perhaps modern technology has advanced to the point where this too is unnecessary, personally - I wouldn't know...I'm that step below an armchair expert....I'm an armchair ignoramus

Tactical Advantage · Post by **Tactical Advantage** » 2005-05-31 04:19

Hmm, boobytraps, whenever I think of this, I think of the movie G.I. Jane, where her leader in the ending mission is being pursued through the rocks, so he pulls the pin on his grenade, and lays his gun over the charging handle and runs, the enemy comes by and picks up the gun and BOOM. What if you could make it where only rigged boodies/supplies would stay, of course it may be kind of suspicious to find a dead body in the middle of a desert, but in a Urban conflict, someone would probably fall for it easy.

Spartan · Post by **Spartan** » 2005-05-31 04:22

Exactly....

I mean. You'd have to be a complete fool to fall for one of these things, but...well, there will always be someone that falls for it. And, as they say...."a fool and his limbs are easily parted"......

Tactical Advantage · Post by **Tactical Advantage** » 2005-05-31 04:30

Spartan wrote:Exactly....

I mean. You'd have to be a complete fool to fall for one of these things, but...well, there will always be someone that falls for it. And, as they say...."a fool and his limbs are easily parted"......

I hear that alot from my teachers, lol.

Dr.x · Post by **Dr.x** » 2005-05-31 04:37

Yea, like in cs where bomb or in case of bf2 C4 has a timer, and Support kits come with a Defusal kit C4 should take 4 seconds to set up and apply on a Tank or vehicle

keef_haggerd · Post by **keef_haggerd** » 2005-05-31 05:10

i think the idea of booby traps is an awsome idea.

like in BFV vanilla one of hte classes could put bombs on vehicles so when someone gets in it blows up.

I think the real trick with booby traps is the fact that they disapear after a certain amount of time, or after you die. i like how in ET there was a set amount of how many mines engs (as a team you could only lay 10 minues i believe) could lay, but they would stay there until they were tripped. i think this should be implemented, since it would get so annoying placnig a trap walking out the door and getting blown up and having ot do that EVERYTIME you get killed.

Today walked through a building that the enemy spawned at and every 10 feet would place a claymore, needless to say i got about 4-5 kills, so yes, in case anyone has doubts booby traps are very useful =)

Beckwith · Post by **Beckwith** » 2005-05-31 05:20

dont suppose theres anyway to code in a trip-wire?

please pretty please

Ugly Duck · Post by **Ugly Duck** » 2005-05-31 22:16

I loved anti-personel mines in BF:V, one of the few things they managed not to break

. The bouncing betties were especialy fun. People were always very predictable in taking the shortest way possible, wich usualy involved a corner and a patch of grass. I'd put some AP mines in the grass and wait for them too come around. Eventualy theyd wise up, but then they had to go wide into an open road and they were fair game for my rifle.

A little bit of stategy can go a long way, and be a lot of fun. Claymores and Bouncing Betties are both handy devices I would like to see on the PR battlefield.

Tactical Advantage · Post by **Tactical Advantage** » 2005-05-31 23:10

PR is going to give us some British SAS members right? With all this talk about trip wires, what would be cool is if we could take a claymore, strap it to an enemy vehicle, then tie the wire to a near by object, when the vehicle starts to move, the wire is pulled and boom!!!

I love using TNT in the WW2 BFV mod, I plant it on a road and crouch down and wait, so far my record is 3 guys at once, they were in an Armored Personal Carrier

Nothing 4 things of TNT cant handle

Post by **JS.Fortnight.A** » 2005-05-31 23:58

An idea with that, seeing that tying up a claymore to a tree, or whatever may be a bit too complex for this engine, unless throughly scripted; would be proximity claymores

Like in good ole Goldeneye 64, lol Proximity mines pwnd!

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2005-06-01 01:56

solodude23 wrote:About Special Ops....I don't know....I just don't like the way its unrealistic in BF2. Its not like theres only one kind of Special Forces. Theres about 5. See below:

Special Forces Officer (Team Leader)
Special Forces Weapons Sergeant
Special Forces Engineer Sergeant
Special Forces Medical Sergeant
Special Forces Communitcations Sergeant

I almost can't stand a few things with "Special Forces" being a single class in the Marines (Special Forces is Army) I keep thinking there should be special maps based on Special Forces or......what it should be...Force Recon.

All normal Marine maps should have Rifleman, Scout, Medic, Auto Rifleman, Engineer, Grenadier, and Anti-Tank. That way its more realistic and it makes a bit more sence.

All Force Recon maps have something like what is listed above (the links)

While Marine Force Recon is a special operations unit, not all US special operations forces have similar structure to US Army Special Forces in terms of individual occupational specialty. The Special Forces have this structure because they are expected to be able to teach their specialties to indigenous forces in the unconventional warfare and foreign internal defense role.

The operators of Marine Recon (both Divisional and Fleet Marine Force) are generalists, in the sense that each man does not have a specialized MOS in Engineering/Demolitions, Communications or Weapons. As for the latter, remember, SF 18B weapons sergeants are all expected to be proficient in everything from small arms to heavy mortars and ATGMs. Marine Recon rarely will be issued anything aside from small arms, but the operators may come from an infantry MOS, which includes mortarmen and assaultmen. Likewise, a Marine Recon man trained in demolitions will most likely not be trained in the types of engineering tasks that the 18C engineer sergeants will be (civil engineering tasks, countermine warfare, etc.), since they are not tasked with helping to build a military or paramilitary infrastructure.

Some individuals may have higher level of proficiency in one or more of the above areas from additional training or just talent, but all of them share the same MOS: Reconnaissance Man- MOS 0321. Fully qualified, "dual-cool" Force Recon guys have MOS 8654- Reconnaissance Man (Parachute and SCUBA/UBA Qualified). The Navy Hospital Corpsmen assigned to Recon units go through the same courses (Amphibious Reconnaissance, Parachute, Combat Diver, unit indocs, etc.) and are the only ones with a different military occupational specialty code or "NEC" (Naval Education Code).

BTW, Ugly Duck, just for your fun-fact file, "AP" stands for "Armor Piercing." The new standard DoD acronym / abbreviation for "anti-personnel" is "APERS."

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2005-06-01 02:28

solodude23 wrote:Ah, well thanks for the info. I didn't know anything about Force Recon. What positions are there though? Everyone is still not obviously the same thing, like there must be a Medic, maybe Auto-Rifleman? What is their normal primary weapon?

Most reconnaissance teams (used to be 4 men standard but that may have changed) are only issued their rifles (M16A4 or M4) and 1 or 2 40mm grenade launchers; possibly sidearms, too. Remember, they are supposed to avoid contact with the enemy and observe/report then bring down artillery, naval gunfire or CAS. This is what the Recon teams did when they were stuck behind the lines in Ras al Khafji. Teams from a Direct Action Platoon will be larger and more heavily armed.

Medics in the Marine Corps, as I said, are US Navy Hospital Corpsmen (HMs) attached to a a platoon or team from the battalion medical platoon. Navy hospital corpsmen attached to Fleet Marine Force units go through additional selection and training in land warfare to be qualified to do so. Those who wish to be assigned to Recon or STA (Surveillance & Target Acquisition- i.e., Scout/Sniper) units go through the same courses as their Marine colleages. Of course, these days, it seems that a lot of the HMs who do this are prior service Marines, anyway.