US anti tank mines and inf doc unlocks.

[Warhawks97]

Not long ago the AT mines in the armor doctrine were moved from doctrine tree unlock and became a WSC upgrade.

But lets be honest, which armor player is currently using these mines?

Most of the time armor player do not have the time, micro attention or res to use them.

There is at best a single or two Engi squads that could possibly build them but most of the time armor players attention is focused on moving and repairing tanks and controling vehicles. If they lay mines, they use usually the Greyhound multipurpose mines. In terms of anti tank weaponary its not needed either due to 90 mm guns. Also ammo is more often used for HVAP shells, war machinery and field repairs, smoke etc.



My suggestion:


Move the US anti tank mines from armor company to infantry company. In all other factions the defensive doctrines have these mines as unlock, def doc, th doc and RE. Why should US armor doc have it then and not even as CP unlock?


I would add the AT mines as an CP unlock somewhere in the US inf doc tree. I thought about linking it with the top unlock line or the defensive branch where the emplacments are.
Like perhaps AT gun emplacment and and 107 mm mortar could become one unlock labled has "heavy fortifications" and the mines taking the other slot.

The M10 could become just as well a standard tank for the US and no CP unlock. Thus the mines could take its slot.

Possibly both is possible.


The current 107 mortar pit slot would be taken by this sector fortifiaction thing and mines would take the M10 slot right left to the fortification. Both would require 1 CP.

Below the sector fortification, the slot which is currently taken by it, would be the slot for the "heavy fortifications" unlocking 76 mm AT gun and the 107 mm mortar.
And finally, below that, where current 76 mm unlock is, would be an unlock the boosts the emplacments health a bit, perhaps even adding HE rounds to the 76 mm AT gun but i think that would be a bit too much, or?



There are a few reasons for this suggestion:

1. US AT mines are looking "missplaced" in the armor doc. Player dont use them and most probably dont even know about them. The doctrine became more and more focused on mobility and having a fleet of tanks and vehicles. There is little time to send the single engi squad somewhere at the map to plant mines here or there. They are often not even at the front since armor doc only need the special rep engis.
2. Recently Menicus started a topic about US inf doc tec tree rework.
3. Complains about usless 76 mm AT gun emplacment (no power, no surviviability)
4. Players demanding M10 to be standard US unit without unlock.
5. Complains about lack of anti tank options.


This way we could get an essential rework of inf docs defensive branch and partially fixing the lack of heavy AT capabilities and weak 76 mm emplacment.


These AT mines, combined with the unlock of "defensive measures" of the upper unlock line, that enables rifle squads to build sandbags and stuff, The rifle squads would also be able to use them, not just pios. That way these AT mines could be effectively used where its needed without need of spamming engis that have to get send accross the map.

[kwok]

from my experience, not many people use AT mines including the ones made available universally for US faction. What would you say would make the doctrine based mine different from the base available mine?

[Warhawks97]

from my experience, not many people use AT mines including the ones made available universally for US faction. What would you say would make the doctrine based mine different from the base available mine?

Obviously more ways to tackle late game Panther roll-out more effectively?


I used the TH doc anti tank mines relatively often. Just one unlock and plant them right in the early stages before the arty expands and before you can provide many hetzers to guard all places.
I had success with it against early cromwell rushes.


In US faction i usually use the ones from greyhound.
But having these mines in inf doc after a few cp would be quite a help, esspecially when you can deploy them with rifle squads after the other upgrade. You can make pushes and then plant mines when panthers and other stuff comes for the counter-attack. Most of the time you have nothing to hold the fresh gained ground bc you had no time to bring AT guns and M10´s into position yet when tanks start rolling towards you.


At least they would be from a far greater usage here than in armor doc.

[MarKr]

I'm not against moving them to Infantry docrine but I don't think people will use them more than in Armor doctrine. How much is it for the heavy mine? 50ammo? In armor doctrine you can spend ammo on things that are more likely to actually cause some damage - activation of AP to get enemy tanks, TC arty (though due to its range, this is limited), Calliope barrages or ammo upgrades for tanks (and later this ammo sink gets removed because they get the upgrades for free with an unlock). In infantry doctrine you spend ammo on off-map barrages (105mm/Longtom), 105mm barrages (Sherman or howitzers), weapon upgrades for infantry... To spend 50 ammo on a mine which can cause heavy damage to a tank but also can just stay where you place it for the rest of the game because no tank drove over it, does not sound as a good investment.
Sure, on some maps with choke points the chance for the mine to hit something is higher but in general it is quite a gamble. I would say that the "multi-purpose" mine are pretty much the best mines you can get because they cost less, can damage and detrack tanks but also can blow up when infantry runs over them so you have higher chance to inflict some damage to your opponent. Perhaps the cost could go down to cost same as the multipurpose mines? The heavy mines are stronger but can only be triggered by vehicles so it is not like you can place them somewhere and just wait till anything walks/drives over them...but maybe even that would not make them more used.

[MenciusMoldbug]

I don't think it's the cost that's the problem but the build time.

Lots of people like using the M8 mine because of how fast it plants, you can get the M8 to lay a multi-purpose mine in 2-3 seconds. Meanwhile it takes forever for infantry squads to lay down anti-tank mines. Problem also is how vulnerable the squad laying the mine is because they all clump up together when they are 'building' it. If mines could be planted at double the speed they do now they'd be used a lot more.

There would be no balance problems with this. Because minesweepers, AOE blasts, artillery rounds, lucky mortar/HE shots, etc. will still kill your mines. Might even kill your own stuff too if you are not careful where you plant them.

[Warhawks97]

I don't think it's the cost that's the problem but the build time.

Lots of people like using the M8 mine because of how fast it plants, you can get the M8 to lay a multi-purpose mine in 2-3 seconds. Meanwhile it takes forever for infantry squads to lay down anti-tank mines. Problem also is how vulnerable the squad laying the mine is because they all clump up together when they are 'building' it. If mines could be planted at double the speed they do now they'd be used a lot more.

There would be no balance problems with this. Because minesweepers, AOE blasts, artillery rounds, lucky mortar/HE shots, etc. will still kill your mines. Might even kill your own stuff too if you are not careful where you plant them.

This but also the kind of units that can use them.

PE places tellermines with their basic gren squad (not sure about the heavy assault squad) and assault pios. These are units you always find on the map and arround the combat areas.

RE places mines with sappers which also stay usually close arround the tanks and thus at front or drop in via glider. As def doc you have plenty of pios bc its a core unit here for all the repairs and buildings.

But in armor doc you have them for the engis which are far from being a unit always present bc once all buildings got build armor doc players dont use the normal engis anymore (like they stay arround somewhere at the map or doesnt exist at all anymore). They use tanks/vehicles, rifles and rep engis as core units but non of them plants tellermines.

So my thought simply is that in inf doc you have plenty of rifles squads at arround the frontline and everywhere. Using defensive measures with them at the time and places needed is much easier. You might not use engis bc you dont need them bc rifles can do this job.

With other words: such weapons like mines in a doctrine have to be available for the core units of this doctrine, else you waist res for units not necessary except for planting mines.



The next aspect is the defensive nature of def, re, Th and inf doc. These docs should have such heavy defensive measures like heavy AT mines.
And the cost? Well i dont think they are such an issue. If you want to drop them down to 35, i dont mind. In armor doc you need quite a lot of ammo at once bc abilties like war machinery and field repairs and HVAP can cost quite a lot, the ammo upgrade is here in order to maintain the ammount of ammo reserves needed for these abilties.

inf doc has off maps, ok, but in terms of inf upgrades they dont need that much ammo as they used to. Firstly bc 7 men rifles are now core infantry and they dont need ammo, secondly the infiltration rangers became more important which have weapons at default, thirdly the losses of infantry is far less than in the past due to quality buff which eventually leads to less frequent weapon purchases.

The last aspect are the complains about lack of AT options for infantry in late game. I guess people gonna use them, esspecially when they see them in the command tree and once they figured out how hard it might be to stop heavy armor late game "spam" (esspecially panthers) as infantry doctrine.

[kwok]

I def agree about mine laying speed. My questions I Would laying mines faster break immersion?

[The New BK Champion]

I def agree about mine laying speed. My questions I Would laying mines faster break immersion?

I also agree with mencius, and I don't think that the speed is planting mines is a thing that people mindfully observe and take into consideration. If they did, someone would already make a notice about the fact that mines can also be dropped from an armored car in 3 seconds, which is obviously more ridiculous than when planted by engineers.

[Mr. FeministDonut]

I personally think that AT mines should be available for the all factions and doctrines, as they are already impossible to use, since their HP is so low, they can be triggered by any explosions that can could happen. Only solution is to plant them behind the frontline, but lack of obvious paths making your ammo getting wasted. On 1v1 maps things are different in a better way
So I suggest it like that:
1. Keep it as before, heavy AT mines would have more HP to be able survive at least one mortar shot
2. Allow all US and WM docs having AT mines and maybe getting speed of laying mines a bit faster, because anything more than a 1v1 map, scout vision or random explosions, as I stated before, makes mines a waste of ammo.

Fixing mines issue would be good step, as it was with flamethrower case, to make gameplay more versatile

[kwok]

If mines are faster to place, this would be a strange balancing buff to factions that have mines, each impacted by a different amount based on mine type availability. What counter balancing ideas are there to prevent potentially OP mines? (Example mines costing more)

[Warhawks97]

I personally think that AT mines should be available for the all factions and doctrines, as they are already impossible to use, since their HP is so low, they can be triggered by any explosions that can could happen. Only solution is to plant them behind the frontline, but lack of obvious paths making your ammo getting wasted. On 1v1 maps things are different in a better way
So I suggest it like that:
1. Keep it as before, heavy AT mines would have more HP to be able survive at least one mortar shot
2. Allow all US and WM docs having AT mines and maybe getting speed of laying mines a bit faster, because anything more than a 1v1 map, scout vision or random explosions, as I stated before, makes mines a waste of ammo.

Fixing mines issue would be good step, as it was with flamethrower case, to make gameplay more versatile

I am against AT mines in all docs. You can have multipurpose mines, ok, but heavy AT mines can deal lots of damage even to heavy tanks. People would perhaps start to complain even more about how quickly their heavies die, esspecially once the effectivness of these become "common knowlegde". A new meta might evolve.

I would prefer to keep this special AT mines doctrinal so that you can take this into consideration when playing against these docs. Otherwise you gonna spend thousands of MP for pershings when fighting BK doc or KT when fighting whatever other doc and always have to keep in mind that one wrong step gonna be the last one.

Since multirpurpose mines can already disable tanks, i dont think heavy AT mines should be spread all accross every faction and doctrine. You would also have to replace the doc unlocks when making heavy AT mines available everywhere.

I would keep these special toys in special docs that are more focused on defensive measures.

[Mr. FeministDonut]

So it better to make it as in my first suggestion, because even if you spam with them, there are a huge chance that it will be just destroyed by random explosion

[kwok]

I'm reviving this topic because my question wasn't answered. Can't make changes without solutions, people.

[MenciusMoldbug]

My idea was to have mines be an upgrade coming from the WSC/Wehr HQ/infantry support structure of PE (where you get inf upgrades)/ or brits HQ (or perhaps the Captain for brits can buy them if there are no UI slots left).

So you can't place mines immediately. They are delayed by an upgrade option which keeps the mines popping up at the same stages as it was before an improvement to them(or close to it).

It's already working in the sense of the US heavy mines upgrade in WSC. However there's currently no clear advantage of using unlockable mines over mines you have from the start/default. Which is why most people skip unlockable RE mines in the CP tree when they can just spam hawkin mines instead.

Factions with mines will be hurt a bit by having their mines be locked behind upgrades. But their mines will get buffed; so in the end it works out for them. The mine unlock upgrade is also useful for setting a 'cost' on mines depending on how powerful they are. Adding another way of balancing mines depending on which ones are used the most.

[idliketoplaybetter]

Wanted to up this topic again.

Actually i had the same impressions as what MM said on his last comment, though i would go even further.

Make all mines that are not specific alike Tellers unlocked from the WSC/t2/ISS build.

No one is using mining right, either because they forget, or Engies are busy whole early-mid game. I wouldnt make any buffs though or whatsoever to it, but maybe cheaper.

[Mr. FeministDonut]

hawks, all factions should get AT mines upgrade just like US from T2, but someone might get a better or specialized type of mines.
Why? For sake of new tactical tools.
Mines are only good in early game, when there is almost no scouts on maps or spamming mortar barrages hitting every fucking pinch of ground.
Rest of mine opinion is in my previous post

[MEFISTO]

I personally think that AT mines should be available for the all factions and doctrines, as they are already impossible to use, since their HP is so low, they can be triggered by any explosions that can could happen. Only solution is to plant them behind the frontline, but lack of obvious paths making your ammo getting wasted. On 1v1 maps things are different in a better way
So I suggest it like that:
1. Keep it as before, heavy AT mines would have more HP to be able survive at least one mortar shot
2. Allow all US and WM docs having AT mines and maybe getting speed of laying mines a bit faster, because anything more than a 1v1 map, scout vision or random explosions, as I stated before, makes mines a waste of ammo.

Fixing mines issue would be good step, as it was with flamethrower case, to make gameplay more versatile

I am against AT mines in all docs. You can have multipurpose mines, ok, but heavy AT mines can deal lots of damage even to heavy tanks. People would perhaps start to complain even more about how quickly their heavies die, esspecially once the effectivness of these become "common knowlegde". A new meta might evolve.

I would prefer to keep this special AT mines doctrinal so that you can take this into consideration when playing against these docs. Otherwise you gonna spend thousands of MP for pershings when fighting BK doc or KT when fighting whatever other doc and always have to keep in mind that one wrong step gonna be the last one.

Since multirpurpose mines can already disable tanks, i dont think heavy AT mines should be spread all accross every faction and doctrine. You would also have to replace the doc unlocks when making heavy AT mines available everywhere.

I would keep these special toys in special docs that are more focused on defensive measures.

100% agree with "Warhawks97"

[Mr. FeministDonut]

I personally think that AT mines should be available for the all factions and doctrines, as they are already impossible to use, since their HP is so low, they can be triggered by any explosions that can could happen. Only solution is to plant them behind the frontline, but lack of obvious paths making your ammo getting wasted. On 1v1 maps things are different in a better way
So I suggest it like that:
1. Keep it as before, heavy AT mines would have more HP to be able survive at least one mortar shot
2. Allow all US and WM docs having AT mines and maybe getting speed of laying mines a bit faster, because anything more than a 1v1 map, scout vision or random explosions, as I stated before, makes mines a waste of ammo.

Fixing mines issue would be good step, as it was with flamethrower case, to make gameplay more versatile

I am against AT mines in all docs. You can have multipurpose mines, ok, but heavy AT mines can deal lots of damage even to heavy tanks. People would perhaps start to complain even more about how quickly their heavies die, esspecially once the effectivness of these become "common knowlegde". A new meta might evolve.

I would prefer to keep this special AT mines doctrinal so that you can take this into consideration when playing against these docs. Otherwise you gonna spend thousands of MP for pershings when fighting BK doc or KT when fighting whatever other doc and always have to keep in mind that one wrong step gonna be the last one.

Since multirpurpose mines can already disable tanks, i dont think heavy AT mines should be spread all accross every faction and doctrine. You would also have to replace the doc unlocks when making heavy AT mines available everywhere.

I would keep these special toys in special docs that are more focused on defensive measures.

100% agree with "Warhawks97"

yo bro, problem is you don't see much mines at all.
maybe some faction can get mines access for free, other will have some limitations
anyway, there will be some use for minesweeper