Project Reality Forums

Suggestion: Increase Combat Engineer's mine amount from 1-2 and increase the amount of Mines per player in, AAS mode, to 60. (Only Conventional Factions. Not for Tali, Militia, Hamas, and Insurgents.)

Reason: To create a new set of tactics for AAS mode games. To simulate the ability of Armies to place and use minefields. To grant the Engineer/His Squad Leader/The Commander more potential.

Estimated Effect: The rate and volume of which a team can place down mines increases two fold. You rearm twice as fast, and can place twice as many mines at a time.

For large 4km maps such an increase in volume is necessary to justify the use of the weapon inside its IRL function in Main Standing Armies. Otherwise, as maps get larger, choke points become less and less forced, and more land must be covered.

Theoretically, on maps like Jabal_2, where the map is completely Asymetrical, this would enable a disruptive force to the supply route of the defending force and also aid in the ability for the defending force to maintain its position.

Jonny wrote:The current placement method is entirely unrealistic. An increase in the amount of mines would not do anything to help this, and would hardly have any effect at all as the full number of possible mines (20, IIRC) are rarely (if ever) placed.

I agree entirely that the method is unrealistic, however, the intent of this suggestion is only to empower the mine laying strategy, which as you say, never, or rarely ever, happens. If there comes another method of mine laying in the future so be it. I'd actually like a link.

The only reason you never see the full number of mines now is due to a lack of planning and desire. To lay a minefield you must have at least two creates (simple), plenty of time (luck), and the terrain must help you. Quite simply on maps like Kashan where land is plenty, a 30 (or even 60) mine minefield won't inhibit your movements much (and besides good luck placing them all). By making an army field a maximum of 120 mines (with a logistics of about six crates) you have doubled the area in which a minefield is effective and only that.

1. A mine of the type found in PR weighs about 10-15 kg, it's not something you carry around a few of on your person.

2. Let me refer you to these two threads: The Engineer and Modern Use of Minefields.

EDIT: Could somebody tell me what the current limit is on simultaneous mines and such is in PR at the moment.

Who cares if the way they're deployed is unrealistic? Who cares if the way they're used in PR isn't 100% true to real life. Neither of those things are relevant to this suggestion. Denying this suggestion and keeping things as they are, still leaves us with an unrealistic mine.

I like the suggestion. But, only in AAS mode. We don't need those kits falling into insurgent hands.

It's true, landmines are heavy little suckers. But, it's also true that when you have a full crate of landmines in front of you, it wouldn't take you 30+ seconds to pick one up.

I understand its not realistic to carry two mines at a time. But its just not realistic to be carrying only one mine (as you would have a supply of them and multiple people to place them all). Unless we get a deployable minefield function (sounds like a good idea to me) the only way PR will have mines is in this fashion. So suspend disbelief for function.

The reason I say an increase in mines is due to the fact that it will decrease re-armament phase and allow a faster built MineField. However, if only the individual mine field was capped at 60 then still I think it'd allow for more realistic mindfields.

gameplay>reality

I like this suggestion. You don't really see mines often on AAS either, as its such a big hassel to actually block off an area with mines or make a mine field

We do use a lot of mines on Muttrah City. You can block off the supply lines or BTRs very easy. It doesn't take to long either.

Eventually I'd like to see the land mines removed from player kits completely, and replace the item with better "engineer" tools and equipment. That kit needs a serious overhaul.


I would then like to see mines deployed via more realistic methods. What I suggested in the past are FASCAM munitions capable of deploying better minefields, which are one of the most common types of employment used today.

A FASCAM field would be of pre-set dimension and mine count, with mine placement slightly random within the overall area. The minefield could then be marked on the map for the owning team, and maybe even deploy some sort of game-world markers or warning message (similar to when you enter dome of death) to prevent friendly players from killing themselves.

The mines used would also have a pre-set delayed self-destruct, just like real mines. This would allow fields to be replaced when the previous one expires, or if it's removed. By limiting the number of minefields active at any given time, you prevent exploitation and also allow movement of fields depending on the enemy's course of action.

Once such a feature is added, we might even see some type of future mine clearing devices such as MICLIC. The conventional forces engineer kit might also have the option of some sort of mine detector, the options are many.


For now, I'm told people are working on coming up with a solution/method, if it's even possible. But because it is low priority, I'm not sure if anyone is currently active in that process.

Too many people Run over their own Team-mates mines. as much as I agree, for game play purposes, I'd have to say we need to keep our limit the same.

I <3 Ninja's idea

Well if we do get a Fascam suitcase... I'd be happy

FASCAM is a good idea. Though its not coming soon as far as I understood from Ninja

Just get a new/better type of mine

Maybe the APC's should be able to lay a mine, might give the .50 APC's some interesting options. Not sure if its realistic tho.

Well since we can't expect FASCAM too much, lets discuss this suggestion a little more.

Current Mechanics:

2 person minefield (max 60 mines):

100mx100m @ 60 mines = .006 saturation. (A little less than a key pad in a 4km map)
100mx50m @ 60 mines = .012 saturation.
100mx25m @ 60 mines = .024 saturation. (25 meters is slightly less than the two two lane streets in PR)

Suggestion:

If you double the mine placement to 120:

100mx100m @120 mines = .012 saturation.
100mx50m @ 120 mines = .024 saturation.
100mx25m @ 120 mines = .048 saturation.

Now of course the increase is 2 fold, and really a saturation of 24+ becomes too much. However, with such mine laying abilities it might be easier to lay a larger amount of smaller dimension and density of mines.

Again such a suggestion has a best impact on the 4km maps of the game.

mikeyboyz wrote:Just get a new/better type of mine

What do you mean?

I know that it would be realistic to have 'deployable' mine fields but I'm not interested in the idea for this particular game.

I like how the mine system is now

My 2p.

mikeyboyz wrote:Just get a new/better type of mine

Exactly we should put in game a nuclear mine...

Blue Peacock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jonny wrote:Lets add some meaning to those numbers:
assuming a gap of 2.5m will stop an APC, each mine must cover a 2.5x2.5m square area to stop it. This gives a 'saturation' (mines per area) of 0.16 to compare things against. Anything higher is more effective at stoppint movement, anything lower is less effective.

A gap of only 2.5m? I never place mines closer than 5m due to the phenomenom of overkill (and the general lack of coverage of the whole minefield as seperation becomes smaller). Many times I've seen a vehicle run over multiple mines after being destroyed simply due to momentum at time of destruction. Simply, when mines just straight out kill a vehcile (I disagree with this, unless it is a lightly amored vehicle), you only need to get lucky once.

Besides each 'layer' of a minefield doesn't have to have the same exact linear density. You have the heavy LD at the entrance and exit and the middle will be sporadic.

But in anycase that is a topic for the think tank.