Remove Or Update The Rifleman Anti-Personnel Kit

[ytman]

Needs more clays to be carried at once. By the time I'm done setting up an effective layer of claymores the enemy has already gotten the objective I was trying to deny them.

This. Maybe just give three 'ammo linked' claymores. This way the Claymores would both rearm faster and you'd have greater flexibility with the more important traps.

I personally really like the AP kit, even in its current form for the trip flares alone... in the hands of the right squad/operator devastating ambushes defensive kill boxes can be had. Obviously the defensive teams (Hamas/INS/Taliban/Militia) have more incentive to use them, however that doesn't mean the conventional forces can't be just as successful.

One really important thing about these weapons is understanding the volume of ammo needed and the actual range of these bad boys. 50 meters peeps.

And to suggest against the 'trip wire' claymore is more than just realism... its lack of killing ability. Only one person will set it off.

[Ninja2dan]

One reason for limited quantity of Claymores per soldier is that in real warfare, Claymores and other such items are issued out in very limited quantities and are often an item that must also be specially requisitioned (not normal issue/supply to all squads/platoons). And when a unit is deployed with Claymores, you might only see 2-4 per platoon, or in very rare cases 2-3 per squad. And those are spread out between the soldiers, usually one soldier only carries one item. Same reason you don't see large quantities of M136 issued out to every grunt either.


As for "chaining" multiple Claymores together, yes it's possible but not with the standard-issue satchel. The top of the Claymore has two wells for the blasting cap, one left and one right. In order to chain Claymores together, a soldier must cut down det cord and crimp caps to both ends to insert into the Claymores to be chained. And the only soldiers in the field that will be packing such equipment are Combat Engineers or specially-trained Squad/Platoon Leaders with specially-requisitioned supplies.

And with chained Claymores, once the first one is command-detonated, the rest of the chain will detonate in series almost immediately after (delay based on length of det cord). There are no multi-switch panels that let you pick and choose which Claymore to light off, this isn't the movies and your common soldier will never see such a device outside of a movie theater. Same goes for radio detonation devices, tripwires, pressure plates, lasers, etc. You get a clacker, that's it.


I do agree that the ability to recover Claymores would be so much more realistic, but you also have to consider how un-realistic the deploy times are in-game. In reality you don't just drop the mine, flip an arming switch, and make things go boom. Properly deploying a Claymore takes an average of 3 minutes, but that time can vary up to 10 minutes each depending on the circumstances. And it takes almost as long to recover one, and in the PR realm it would be much easier just to find an ammo crate and resupply your inventory.

By having greatly-reduced in-game deployment times and lacking all of the "complex" tasks associated with effectively setting one up to actually inflict kills, I think it's more than a fair trade-off.


As for some of the older posts regarding the disabling/disarming of Claymores, it's pointless. Because they are command-detonation only, if you're able to even get close enough to disarm it, then the person with the clacker is obviously dead or not at his post. I will not go into details about EOD techniques or explosives technology, for obvious reasons.

[ytman]

Basically, and I've felt this way from the start, any squad wanting to use the AP kit well needs both time and resources. I've been doing some tests and the AP mines seem very potent... its just about observation and placement.

[ComradeHX]

I think the problem with not being able to recover claymores is that you blow up all the linked ones at the same time(if you placed ones near your own fob...lots of team kill) even if you are at the other end of the map for ambush.

[ShockUnitBlack]

So what do we want to do?

[ComradeHX]

As for some of the older posts regarding the disabling/disarming of Claymores, it's pointless. Because they are command-detonation only, if you're able to even get close enough to disarm it, then the person with the clacker is obviously dead or not at his post. I will not go into details about EOD techniques or explosives technology, for obvious reasons.

Are you 100% sure that Claymores used by U.S. is command-detonated only?

I recall seeing something about U.S., China, Russia, and some other countries not signing that international treaty regarding anti-personnel mines.
Ottawa Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[dtacs]

Basically, and I've felt this way from the start, any squad wanting to use the AP kit well needs both time and resources. I've been doing some tests and the AP mines seem very potent... its just about observation and placement.

Agreed. I've been owned by claymores many times but I can't work out why so little people use it even though they're aware of its potential.

[ytman]

Are you 100% sure that Claymores used by U.S. is command-detonated only?

I recall seeing something about U.S., China, Russia, and some other countries not signing that international treaty regarding anti-personnel mines.
Ottawa Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Just because the treaty isn't signed doesn't mean AP mines don't use clackers by default. I've found a couple US FMs for AP mine using and the general thing is that its command detonated.

The Claymore would be a useless waste of effort and resources if it went off whenever one person walked by.

-----

On the subject of 'grenade traps' no conventional faction should get them. Booby traps aren't able to be properly scaled in PR... the time scale and constant flow of battle doesn't work for it. On the other hand the Unconventional forces, by the nature of defending, are able to place booby traps reasonably since any position lost is not assumed to be fought for again in the near future.

[Ninja2dan]

Are you 100% sure that Claymores used by U.S. is command-detonated only?

I recall seeing something about U.S., China, Russia, and some other countries not signing that international treaty regarding anti-personnel mines.
Ottawa Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Ottawa Treaty was an agreement to stop using any and all anti-personnel mines, to stop new production of such mines, and begin destruction/removal of stockpiles of such mines.

While the US and other nations have declined signing of the treaty, many of them have taken steps to improve the technology and design of AP mines so that, although those nations will not cease use, they are attempting to make the mines "safer" for post-conflict removal. For example, most US AP mines are now designed with self-destruct mechanisms and we no longer use "booby traps" or leave non-destructing mines unattended.


The M18A1 Claymore Anti-Personnel Mine is packaged in its bandoleer with only the M57 "clacker". All US Army soldiers are trained to use the M18A1 during their Basic Combat Training (Boot Camp), and they are all trained to use it exactly as the TM/FM states and as directed on the instruction sheet located on the bandoleer flap.

But due to the design of the M18A1, it is possible to use a non-electric cap for detonation, in the same manner that they are chained. When chaining mines, the primary uses the M57 and electric cap, while the rest of the mines in the series are detonated with a non-electric cap and a length of det cord. But as I mentioned above, only a very limited number of soldiers in the field will be trained to use demolitions equipment and be issued such equipment necessary for non-electric priming.


Without disclosing too much detail, I am trained and qualified in military/DoD, law enforcement, and commercial/industrial demolitions/blasting. During my time in the military, I was trained to use alternative methods of initiating the Claymore mines. But this was not training that your average soldier would receive, nor were those methods something you'd use on a regular basis. In other words, the mine does have the capability for alternative detonation methods, but the chances of most people seeing it or even learning how to do it are slim.

And those alternative methods are also intended only for emergency/survival situations, or during limited special operations where the "normal" rules are shifted slightly.

[ComradeHX]

On the subject of 'grenade traps' no conventional faction should get them. Booby traps aren't able to be properly scaled in PR... the time scale and constant flow of battle doesn't work for it. On the other hand the Unconventional forces, by the nature of defending, are able to place booby traps reasonably since any position lost is not assumed to be fought for again in the near future.

Russians have easy-to-set 0 second fuses for their F1 and RGD-5 grenades.
I talked to some veterans(one Soviet and one in RusFed VDV during 2nd Chechen war) and found out that they all knew how to use those as grenade traps for obvious reasons(also very easy to disarm, obviously just put the pin back in).

They are in very conventional forces. At least Russians should have them.

Only thing needed is a way to remove them(IRL it only takes less than 10 seconds once you get your hands on the grenade without blowing up).

[ytman]

Russians have easy-to-set 0 second fuses for their F1 and RGD-5 grenades.
I talked to some veterans(one Soviet and one in RusFed VDV during 2nd Chechen war) and found out that they all knew how to use those as grenade traps for obvious reasons(also very easy to disarm, obviously just put the pin back in).

They are in very conventional forces. At least Russians should have them.

Only thing needed is a way to remove them(IRL it only takes less than 10 seconds once you get your hands on the grenade without blowing up).

No you misunderstand. Boobytraps of all kinds are used by all armies, troops are trained in the creation of such unconventional traps afaik, something as simple as a grenade trap is almost a no brainer afaik. What I mean to say is that the scale of the AAS battles tends to allow both sides (even unconventional forces) to regain lost land easily.

Due to this its strongly advised by any military to not booby trap an area where you will be fighting in again. Once an area is booby trapped you have effectively given up on the position in the immediate future. Because of that I feel that grenade traps would serve no purpose for the Conventional Forces. It would arise from an overly specific strategic situation that no Conventional Force would want to have happen; the loss of a CP.

Furthermore, if such a weapon is regulated to the AP kit its value as a 'weapon of fear' would be more than diminished when compared to the unconventional factions that receive the weapon as standard.

The value of the Unconventional Grenade Trap is its volume. With the way ammo works one NVA Rifleman can place three grenade traps rapidly and retreat. A reasonably organized team can, with a single squad, place more than 12 grenade traps in less than five minutes and then vacate the area.

You'd have a very hard time being so effective with just one AP kit in your squad.

[ComradeHX]

Due to this its strongly advised by any military to not booby trap an area where you will be fighting in again. Once an area is booby trapped you have effectively given up on the position in the immediate future. Because of that I feel that grenade traps would serve no purpose for the Conventional Forces. It would arise from an overly specific strategic situation that no Conventional Force would want to have happen; the loss of a CP.

They can be used for simply securing the area(not deny it from everyone...); as in cover that door to the building/courtyard so people do not waltz in. Or "cover possible approach vector of enemy while you sleep/eat" type of thing. Most buildings can have all entry points covered by one AP rifleman very easily.

If you are leaving the area; you pick them up and then retreat(which is why there needs to be a system for that or grenade traps should not be usable) because they turn back into perfectly usable grenades instead of piece of extra weight(like MON-50). Not leave them there and potentially injure completely uninformed teammate.

They have no effect on retaking the area because even if they are not picked up, they are most likely disarmed by enemy when you take back the area or you still remember where they are.

The scale of AAS in this game (the standard 32vs32) is quite small...relaying position of grenade trap is no problem.

If you are going to deploy something like 12 grenade traps; you might as well have a option in-game to set up invisible AP minefields... The purpose for 2-3 grenade traps is not for denying an entire area.

[PFunk]

A claymore pick up would definitely mean that people would use them more liberally. Why would I drop one in a situation where I figure using it would be unlikely if I figure we may enter one where it is soon enough? But if using that claymore could have kept us from dying it would have made the difference between an AP kit being totally useless 90% of the time to being possibly useful most of the time.

It would mean any time the claymore isn't useful you could still deploy it, like pulling out your LAT anytime you figure a vehicle might be there. If you had to commit to using a LAT or a HAT in the same way it would be extremely difficult to make that decision to commit.

[ytman]

They can be used for simply securing the area(not deny it from everyone...); as in cover that door to the building/courtyard so people do not waltz in. Or "cover possible approach vector of enemy while you sleep/eat" type of thing. Most buildings can have all entry points covered by one AP rifleman very easily.

If you are leaving the area; you pick them up and then retreat(which is why there needs to be a system for that or grenade traps should not be usable) because they turn back into perfectly usable grenades instead of piece of extra weight(like MON-50). Not leave them there and potentially injure completely uninformed teammate.

Grenade traps are, afaik, simulating booby traps. The employment of grenade traps IRL is a much more time consuming affair then currently in game. To suggest that real life forces would block off its own doorways with grenade traps is a bit silly. Sure it can happen in some dire circumstances.... but its not standard fare.

They have no effect on retaking the area because even if they are not picked up, they are most likely disarmed by enemy when you take back the area or you still remember where they are.

Not reasomable. Heck in real warfare the enemy could booby trap your trap... why give them the option? Booby traps are nuisance/psychological warfare weapons, not killing tools, in conventional armies.

Unconventional armies use what they can and understand that their guerilla tactics facilitate booby traps.

The scale of AAS in this game (the standard 32vs32) is quite small...relaying position of grenade trap is no problem.

It is when the mine markers don't stay placed by an SL for more than five minutes. The traps have a life spawn of the Kit+20min.

If you are going to deploy something like 12 grenade traps; you might as well have a option in-game to set up invisible AP minefields... The purpose for 2-3 grenade traps is not for denying an entire area.

Lol why? The next chance I get at an NVA team in decent jungle I'm making a sapper annoyance squad. It works out really well and isn't expected.

[ComradeHX]

Grenade traps are, afaik, simulating booby traps. The employment of grenade traps IRL is a much more time consuming affair then currently in game. To suggest that real life forces would block off its own doorways with grenade traps is a bit silly. Sure it can happen in some dire circumstances.... but its not standard fare.

It was not that time consuming; just tie string from the pin to another point to form tripwire, and set the fuse to 0 second while securing the grenade to something solid.

They do not simulate every kind of booby trap like how deployable sandbags simulate trenches...
Because Grenade traps can exist(although should not be contained in a can like in PR...) and work as intended with 0 second fuse + tripwire.

They are very simple grenade traps that are easy to setup and easy to disarm...not some elaborate deathtrap requiring extra effort in setting up(such as POM-Z).

Not reasomable. Heck in real warfare the enemy could booby trap your trap... why give them the option? Booby traps are nuisance/psychological warfare weapons, not killing tools, in conventional armies.

Yo dawg I heard you like booby traps...

Again, these are very simple grenade traps... I like to see you try booby trapping a simple grenade trap without making it seem blatantly obvious.

And what else is the enemy going to do? Leave these SIMPLE TO DISARM IF SPOTTED traps on the ground? Or disarm and possibly reuse as just some more grenades(provided they actually know how to switch the fuse back to 3-4 second)? Grenades are totally killing tools, plain and simple. If you want psychological warfare so much, you should use: the sign that marks the minefield, ground covered in butterfly mines, ...etc.

Think multiday patrol in an area; set grenade trap around the perimeter before going to sleep, pick them up in the morning and go on. Nothing unconventional... Think of them as more useful tripflares.

Unconventional armies use what they can and understand that their guerilla tactics facilitate booby traps.

Conventional armies use what they can if necessary and understand when their tactics also allows for use of grenade traps.

It is when the mine markers don't stay placed by an SL for more than five minutes. The traps have a life spawn of the Kit+20min.

You tell friendlies a building is grenade trapped at a specific grid coordinate. Better yet, tell them there is no need to rush in because your squad is defending it(that is what you are supposed to use a grenade trap for, regularly).

That is all; if they run in like idiots, it is their fault.

There should be option to pick up the grenade traps anyway(press G?) or grenade trap thing would be very unrealistic to implement.

Not to mention the current F1 grenades used should have much bigger damage/kill radius.

Lol why? The next chance I get at an NVA team in decent jungle I'm making a sapper annoyance squad. It works out really well and isn't expected.

Yeah you try that.

Not that effective when people go crawling in bushes instead of sprinting through them like idiots.

And get owned in CQB by full-auto M14.

[ytman]

Can we never find something to agree on ?

Well in anycase I stand by the idea that all Conventional Forces wouldn't come to a situation where booby traps would prove to be standard issue. The Rifleman AP kit is, as I see it, a requisition of supplies for the purpose of ambush and area denial, a form of active defense. Booby traps are a form of nuisance warfare that isn't needed to be simulated in PR:BF2 (I'd be fine with it in PR:ArmAII) beyond the unconventional factions.

Making the Rifleman AP kit more important is less about changing his weapons and tools and more about dedicating an entire squad to its proper employment. With Large scale battles on the horizon I'd figure the AP role will be much more important then now.

I'd figure a good MEC squad on Muttrah could have two roads completely shut down with an AP kit. It just requires time, effort, and supplies.

I know as USMC I've defended the Northern City with an Engineer in my squad. The same could be done with the Rifleman AP now that I think of it.

[Truism]

Thread misses the actual problem which is that claymores in game are piss weak compared to real life counterparts.

Make the radiuses and damage templates realistic and people will find tactics for them and use them. If you don't know the RL tab data, look it up on Wiki and think about how you could use weapons that do that...

[Ninja2dan]

Thread misses the actual problem which is that claymores in game are piss weak compared to real life counterparts.

Make the radiuses and damage templates realistic and people will find tactics for them and use them. If you don't know the RL tab data, look it up on Wiki and think about how you could use weapons that do that...

We have plenty of data on the M18A1, as well as first-hand experience/feedback on its use and capabilities.

Because this is still a game, some aspects of various items/features have been increased or reduced in order to better apply them to a game environment. For example, artillery explosions in the game have been reduced for obvious reasons. If the in-game Claymore mine is in fact of reduced range/damage capability compared to the real-world item, that was done for good reason. But I'll leave one of the Developers to comment more on that.

As a note, I highly recommend against using Wikipedia as a primary source of reference information, especially when it comes to military equipment. There are several MA's on the PR team, so we have access to all official data on those items as well as information that is not publicly available. And because many items of military issue are updated regularly, it is often likely that information posted on sites like a Wiki are outdated.

[ComradeHX]

Well in anycase I stand by the idea that all Conventional Forces wouldn't come to a situation where booby traps would prove to be standard issue. The Rifleman AP kit is, as I see it, a requisition of supplies for the purpose of ambush and area denial, a form of active defense. Booby traps are a form of nuisance warfare that isn't needed to be simulated in PR:BF2 (I'd be fine with it in PR:ArmAII) beyond the unconventional factions.

Well, I find that grenades are very much standard issue.

Not 100% sure about strings, though; but I think they are not too hard to get from the Contramag or Chipok(depending on which one is more available) or just a local shop in deployment area.

[ytman]

Thread misses the actual problem which is that claymores in game are piss weak compared to real life counterparts.

Make the radiuses and damage templates realistic and people will find tactics for them and use them. If you don't know the RL tab data, look it up on Wiki and think about how you could use weapons that do that...

Wrong.

The Claymore is very effective in game, what is probably hard is the placement so that the blast isn't obstructed/angled poorly by terrain.

Put one on the ground and walk 40 meters from it. Pretty lethal still... now imagine if you have four claymores covering the same relative area.


@ Comrade-

You are skipping my point due to a poor choice of words in one location. Its not standard practice to booby trap your own position.