C4 Why Won't you let me Blow Stuff up

[Pure_beef]

I'm bleeding out, I shoot an MEC guy as he tries to lay a mine for our apc, i grab his kit in the hope of a bandage, none left. Sniper tells us there is an apc heading our way, well im gonna bleed out so i may as well try and nail this apc. I have C4, i run up to apc, plant C4 on apc's side, run away, click detonator.....click detonator....turn around check apc, apc is still there...click detonator...still no explosion....WHAT THE FUCK

Now this is not a one off, every time i have ever tried to wack a C4 on a vehicle or by a vehicle then leg it to try and blow it up, i click and nothing happens.

Am i missing something here? Is every 1 out 3 C4's a dud? do I have to wait for the radio signals from the detonator to reach the C4? Please enlighten me on this...

[AfterDune]

You have to wait about 5 seconds before you can detonate C4. You sure you waited that long?

[Chuc]

The audio cue, which is the "beepbeepbeep" is a rough indication that the C4 is armed. Ideally you'd detonate a few seconds after, just to be safe.

[ballard_44]

From the manual...

C4 is much stronger now and affects a larger radius. It takes 5 seconds
to arm after placing. A sound will indicate when the C4 is armed.

[Truism]

There's nothing wrong with placing C4 on a vehicle, as long as you don't intend to use it as a suicide car and ram the other dude before setting it off.

I have no problems with using a vehicle or vehicle corpse to hide a C4 or lure enemies into it. In some situations I even advocate using it as a firebase destruction mechanism, where the bomb car is driven up to the FB, then the driver gets to cover while the engi, some distance away, blows it.

[AnRK]

Does C4 blow vehicles up now? I know it wasn't capable of it when it was in the spec ops kit's hands, has it been made more potent for the combat engineer?

There's nothing wrong with placing C4 on a vehicle, as long as you don't intend to use it as a suicide car and ram the other dude before setting it off.

I have no problems with using a vehicle or vehicle corpse to hide a C4 or lure enemies into it. In some situations I even advocate using it as a firebase destruction mechanism, where the bomb car is driven up to the FB, then the driver gets to cover while the engi, some distance away, blows it.

Sorry to be boring, but how many conventional militaries would blow an expensive 4x4 up for something like that?

[Truism]

Consider that a firebase represents an emplacement which serves as a reinforcement point - destroying it is a big deal, I think it's logical that they might. Finding a man to drive the 4x4 would be harder.
The Chechans would for sure.
Chinese probably would.
MEC would.
US probably wouldn't.
GB probably wouldn't.
Russia might.

This is with regards to firebase bombing. I think any military would consider using a 4x4 as a trap if the rewards were substantial enough (armour destroyed, critical objective destroyed, enemy attacking element destroyed).

[Pure_beef]

Oh god, its a game. sneaking in to put C4 on vehicles is a tactic. Im not going to not do it because they wouldn't do it in RL

[Rudd]

OGT, C4 in the tunnel or the road out of Chi main is just hilarious

running through the forest chased by angry chinamen...priceless.

I mean...you can use it on vehicles etc...you can't just toss it on and run and blow immediately thats all, gotta get to a safe distance and check no1 is gonna get hurt from ur side, thats the true purpose of the 5 sec delay.

There is a bug that you accidentally click twice, which renders the c4 useless. but if it wasn't for the delay you'd blow everyone up around you...

[AnRK]

Oh god, its a game. sneaking in to put C4 on vehicles is a tactic. Im not going to not do it because they wouldn't do it in RL

Might wanna consider finding a different game to play then since that's kinda the point of this one...

Consider that a firebase represents an emplacement which serves as a reinforcement point - destroying it is a big deal, I think it's logical that they might. Finding a man to drive the 4x4 would be harder.
The Chechans would for sure.
Chinese probably would.
MEC would.
US probably wouldn't.
GB probably wouldn't.
Russia might.

This is with regards to firebase bombing. I think any military would consider using a 4x4 as a trap if the rewards were substantial enough (armour destroyed, critical objective destroyed, enemy attacking element destroyed).

Your right about it being important, but it's still kinda a silly tactic, anyway just cos China, "MEC" nations, and Russia conduct their militaries in a somewhat harsher manner then the U.S. or UK doesn't mean that they view their kit or personnel as expendable. It might be tactically valuable to take out whatever a firebase would equate to, but wasting a god knows how much it would cost military 4x4 and potentially a few expensively trained soldiers in the process?

Chechens did begin suicide bombing in 2000 though, although it seems like they're less into it then other Muslim resistance groups.

[Spec]

As everyone said, the C4 is not supposed to be used that way. It's common in vBF2 to run up to a tank and plant C4 on it, but this is certainly not a realistic tactic. If you want suicide bombing, play insurgent or taliban, they do have that kind of stuff. The C4 of the regular armies, however, is not supposed to be used in that kind of way. If you want to blow something up, such as a bridge, a firebase, or if you want to put it on a road similiar to a mine, then you can still do that.

[Rudd]

I don't see the problem tbh, if he has the engineer kit, and no at is around, and he has the chance to sneak in and plant the c4 he can, it just takes a while as it does IRL...

its a tactic with risks and benefits...whats the problem, the current way of doing it is fine.

[AnRK]

Yeah I don't see a problem with it directly either, if your in a situation that C4 will get you out of then why not, but C4 isn't an anti-vehicle weapon and shouldn't really be seen as one unless you really need it to be.

[Truism]

A soldier with his training and equipment is far more expensive than a military 4x4, not to mention that his death is pretty much guaranteed to add to a shitstorm on the home front. If planting on a 4x4 had the potential to prevent even a handful of deaths down the line it would be worth it almost automatically from an economic standpoint.

Whether you're from the US or Russia, that fact remains the same.

[Tannhauser]

The Chechans would for sure.
Chinese probably would.
MEC would.
US probably wouldn't.
GB probably wouldn't.
Russia might.

Funny how anyone not in NATO would...

So... MEC would waste a GAZ-Vodnik with a powerfull cannon on top of it, just to blow up a fortified position?
So... PLA would waste a VN3 with the same powerfull gear, for the same reason?
So... Russian would sacrifice a BRDM or a Vodnik that could also be used even more efficiently against said FB, for that?...

Right.
Then i'll suicide charge FBs with a HMMWV then, it seems if they can sacrifice an even more armored VN3, it's not wrong to sacrifice a billion+ worth asset

[Pure_beef]

IT was not for suicide, if you had read my post you would of seen that I was running away from the apc once I had planted it, I got behind cover and detonated. Nothing happened

[Spec]

IT was not for suicide, if you had read my post you would of seen that I was running away from the apc once I had planted it, I got behind cover and detonated. Nothing happened

Something would've happened if you'd have waited a few more seconds. This is the only known way to fix the suicide problem.

Additionally, I'm not a fan of the planting-c4-on-fully-manned-vehicles stuff either. That's just a bit Vanilla imo.

[Rudd]

Additionally, I'm not a fan of the planting-c4-on-fully-manned-vehicles stuff either. That's just a bit Vanilla imo.

a reason to fully man vehicles in PR....more likely to catch the guys who take advantage of ur vulnerabilities