Team colors for mines

I'd say, keep it. Think about how this is in REAL-LIFE. There's no way to tell if a mine is friendly or NOT in real life. In fact, that mine will damage or kill you, it's called "Friendly Fire" in real life, which this game lacks. And perhaps we need it because there are a lot of idiots that are lobbing mortars in friendly areas and mines in friendly areas without considering, and needing to consider the consequences. Games like COD, BattleField and other FPS have such game modes, which makes the game more challenging and realistic. Nothing is realistic with the way mines work right now, there's no way a real mine can know it's friendly targets, nor do real shots via cannons suddenly nerf itself upon a team member.

 

I know right I already see the mine... If it's out in the open no big deal I go around it. But if it's blocking a choke point that I want to get through to make an attack I would like to know if I can drive over it or if I have to go all the way around some rocks or something to get to my enemy. Being able to identify friendly mines would make them more effective. That way I could see how a teammate is setting trap and work with it.

 

No, because if the teammate set up the trap, and you actually took part and watched it, then you would know that it's friendly. Now if you weren't even there when that happened, why would it be fair to the enemy team that you somehow know what you weren't supposed to know? That's competitive advantage based on knowledge you weren't supposed to know in the first place.

 

Can you please stop trying to bring real-life into any discussion on this forum? Battle Bay is a very unrealistic and colorful game, we don't need to obey any realism, and we don't need friendly fire. You're also seriously off-topic, since you're trying to push some friendly fire agenda when we're trying to have a discussion on mine coloration.

So, doesn't that mean there's automatically a competitive advantage if only the enemy team has mines equipped? Mine launchers aren't quiet weapons, guys, you don't need to be directly looking at the mine being placed to know who's team it's on.

 

Seriously people? Mines are hard enough weapons to use and get too few kills already.
Changing the color would defeat the purpose. Just avoid them or remember who put them down.

 

No, and that's why I said keep it the way it is. It's not realism, in the sense that current weapons don't damage friendly targets, so mines shouldn't either. Neither can you tell mid fire of cannons whether that projectile is friendly or not (except mortars). Is it off topic? No, I'm talking about mines, and how they behave, and people asking to "SEE a colour coded, friendly mine" is exactly the topic of friendly-fire, to nerf them and give them a indication to friends. All I'm saying is that it's not realistic, and if we considered realism, there's further reasoning that completely nerfing it and color coding them makes zero sense.

As for how realistic the game becomes is up to Rovio, last time I checked it used pretty realistic weapon and physics engines where waves and other mechanisms affect gameplay. People even talked about random weather effects(rain, fog etC) that could change the map visiblity and wave turbulance (wouldn't that be cool?). So why not? It's based on weaponized Ships on a body of water...

Well that's part of knowing right? But if you're not looking, you wouldn't know of the exact location. That's my point. And as far as I know, the enemy team also creates the exact same sound.

 

I don't see it as a nerf, but I think it's justified to avoid hindering your own team with it. Even in situations where both teams have a mine launcher and lay them in similar places, I don't like the idea that my own teammate instead of the enemy could be the one who wanders into the minefield and dies. I like my weapons to kill the enemy with no chance of fooling my own team. Projectiles don't need color-coding because they're always going in one direction and you can't possibly be tricked into trying to dodge a cannon shot. Mortars are color-coded for the exact reason I'm talking about, should we take the colors off mortar shells? I would rather napalm be color-coded, but the landing target is colored so I guess they didn't think it was necessary.

Even if I don't see it, I usually have a pretty good idea of where it is. If my team has one, I can just look at the map. If the enemy team has one, I can guess based on where the enemy is. It's only if both teams have one that it gets difficult to tell. In any case, if I ran into the mine without knowing where it was, then the color wouldn't have mattered anyway. In most cases, regardless of whether I know the exact location, I have a good idea of which team it belongs to.

 

That's just a want, and what you say would give competitive advantage to both sides knowing what mine is friendly. And ontop of that Napalms would too and glow green all of sudden, and now you have the freedom to ride over it without hesitation. That's the part I don't agree with, hesitation in this game can mean the difference of life or death, win or lose. So all of sudden you no longer have that hesitation to pass, and why did you have that hesistation? Because you didn't know it's friendly or not. Which leads to....

So you're telling me because you're not looking and you have this telepathic ability to listen and know where all the friendly mines are for the entire battle? How do you know your random friendles (not fleet) have mines equiped? Do you know just the first couple seconds at home spawn area? Because that's some insane way of "knowing" all. So why do you need to color codes all of a sudden? That's contradictory now is it?

 

That's a double-edged sword! The same hesitation that could be granting you kills, as the mine user, could easily be granting kills to the enemy team. Is that worth it?

It's called having my sound turned on and looking at the map. If I can't see the mine being thrown on my screen, that means it has to be somewhere out of my sight. Since I know where my team is, and usually also where the enemy team is since they're visible on the map after being revealed, it's pretty simple guesswork to know who the mine belongs to. In most games I otherwise know which friendlies have a mine equipped since they will launch one at some point at the start of the match before the team spreads out. They do it all the time. If I they don't, I just use the method I stated before.

I "need" the color codes because of the aforementioned double-edged sword. I'm concerned about my own team getting fooled by mines they can't identify if both teams have a mine user. Personally, any time I run into a mine, the color doesn't matter since I run into them on accident. If I see them beforehand, I just go around unless I know they're friendly.

 

Too many needs or ifs or wants here. Can't you see where I'm going?
It's not a double edge sword right now, it's a obstacle for everyone, just like what Napalm is. If you don't know it's friendly or not, then you don't know ie; if you saw the Napalm drop from friendlies, you would know it's fine, and the same applies to mines. If you don't know, then you don't know! Then why should you know? That's the part where we disagree and you say that they should...

 

"An obstacle for everyone" is a double-edged sword. Do you know what that expression means?

 

Obstacle is an object which everyone needs to go around or over. Double-edge sword is when something can have both favorable and unfavorable consequences. Sure you can say they are the same, but when everyone is avoiding it, there really isn't a negative as the obstacle is making everyone avoid it no matter what. It would be a double edge sword if people can see it being friendly. It really depends on how you interpret it. To be honest, I don't know what your point is and you're contradicting yourself constantly now.

 

Plan and simple....ITS YOUR CHOICE, RUN IT OVER OR GO AROUND!!!! IF U RUN IT OVER AND IT'S ENEMY'S THEN U MADE A BAD DECISION. Every choice u make has a some sort of reprucution. STOP WITH THE QQ!!!!!!

 

Give me one example where I've contradicted myself. Especially in my previous, two-sentence post. I get that you're implying that I'm being subjective, rather than objective, but if you can't prove that then I'm going to have to go ahead and disregard it.

Going around an obstacle is a negative, since it's a tactical disadvantage. You're effectively zoning your own team if they constantly need to move around your obstacles. Just because the enemy is doing it, too, doesn't mean you're not negatively impacting your team. By comparison, you could use literally any other weapon and only negatively impact the enemy (except maybe Napalm, which doesn't last as long). How would friendly coloring on friendly mines be a double-edged sword? At worst, it would lead to less people running over mines they clearly saw beforehand but, personally, I seriously doubt most mine kills actually come from that.

Here's my point, since maybe I've been restating other people's arguments too much:
- Friendly coloring will reduce confusion.
- No enemy coloring means enemy mines won't be any more visible than they are now.
- I think most mine damage is blind/accidental (the subjective part of the argument).
- If most mine damage is accidental, then changing mine colors would only decrease friendly difficulty in getting around the map.
- The flipside is that enemies would be more likely to avoid mines that they see. I think that's worth it, since most mine damage is accidental anyway (again, subjective).
- My opinion is backed up by my own experiences and the fact that most of the people who commented on this thread avoid all mines regardless of the source.

I don't know how I can say it any clearer. So far, only @ekagreen and @Bennunator have admitted to running into a mine because they really thought it was friendly. It's possible that they represent a much larger sum of people, but I'm not sure about that.

 

You have contradicted yourself because you claim that you know where and can listen to where friendly mines will be, and that with knowing that, the visual green confirmation would then be of favor to you since you would "Need" that in order to make your mine field or your friendlie's mindfield more effective. However, it contradictory because:
1.) You said you knew or can guess where they are
2.) It doesn't matter if they would need a visual, because accidentally running over them would confirm that the minefield is working or not. Friend or Foe.

Going around an obstacle is only\ a single edged sword, it would give the same playing field to both yourself/your team and the enemy. The only difference is not knowing and that there could be damage spit upon you if it indeed is your enemies' and not your own.
Having a GREEN lit mine would indeed be a double-edged sword. If read my definition (ty Websters dictionary) it could be both favorable and unfavorable consequences. So in other words, having a mine colored is unfair advantage to friends because that's information / knowledge that you had no idea of (if you didn't physically see it land there). So that becomes a favorable consequence that could be used towards yourself or used against an enemy(like luring an enemy there from a chase). It would not be the case if the player did not know whether that mine is friendly, and simply avoided it.

My responses in blue...

 

I never said that it would make mines more effective, I said they would be less harmful to friendlies. I also said I could best tell who's mines are who's when only one team has them. If both teams have them it's harder to tell.

An example for neutral obstacles being a double-edged sword has been said several times already. For example, let's say you're running from an enemy who is spamming mortars. You want to hide in a tunnel but there's a mine blocking the way. You opt to avoid running into the mine because the damage is so much higher, and continue getting blasted by mortars even though that was a friendly mine. What if you're on a Speeder, sailing on the wind and potshotting people, when you see a mine right at the last second and come to a complete stop. Since you stopped, someone snipes you out with a Railgun, even though that was a friendly mine. That's not a "single-edged" sword. A Cannon is a "single-edged" sword.
The example you gave for green mines doesn't sound bad. Why wouldn't I want my team to have an unfair advantage...?

To your responses:
There's always confusion if both teams have a mine.
By "blind/accidental", I meant that you either didn't see the mine before running into it or were otherwise pushed in it's direction. You weren't tricked by the mine, you simply didn't have a choice at all.
If you want to get a better sample size to support either argument, be my guest. If it turns out that the good majority of mine kills are from bad guesses, I'll gladly reverse my opinion.

To the rest of that, I'm not sure you understood my point at all, but I'm officially tired of reexplaining it. I don't feel like going through another two pages trying to figure out why you think mines would be nerfed out of the game if they implemented this, but don't think mines are confusing.

 

Likewise. I'm repeating myself as your only looking at it one way and not consider the consequences of creating a green lit mine which makes no sense at all. Neither is good for the game nor is it realistic. It's some nintendo type game logic that makes no sense.

Btw your tunnel situation is completely normal. That situation is as real as you can get, in fact, real mines aren't even visible above water. (without going into doing full friendly fire topic)

What i'm against is the sudden creation of that not by intention, but sporadically because someone not premeditation on your team creating a minefield without your knowledge, and because of the green lit mines, you take advantage of it. Whereas in game now, you wouldn't know those mines are friendly and had no way of knowing that and therefore wouldn't be able to use this tactic. ala favourable consequence aka double edged sword. Also green litting mine exposes the enemy mine, so it's lessening it's effectiveness as a mine fundamentally.

 

Helping your own team out isn't a double-edg- GAH. Nevermind!

Make a new thread if you want to talk about moving the game in a more "realistic" direction.

 

Here's your definition of double edge sword
http://bfy.tw/C5gW
If you ask me, this is a overused proverb that makes little sense. I wouldn't use it to describe mines to be quite honest. Because every weapon can be described as a double edge sword, railgun is a double edge sword because it has a really long cooldown, but has devastating damage. The regular cannon is a double edge sword because of its weak damage, but the cooldown makes it a good dps weapon. the healing box is a double edge sword because although it heals people, if people fail to pick it up and the enemy can negate it, it becomes wasted. get where this is going? Everything has a positive and negative effect or a pro and con.

When did i say i wanted it to be more realistic? I said to keep it the way it is, because having friendly indicated mines goes further away from that.

 

This thread is hilarious, as a mine user i think putting colors on the mines will kill it as an effective weapon. Mines are used to manage game flow. I put a mine i a passage so i can stop the other team from coming through that passage.

I have been killed many time thinking im going over my own mine when in fact it is an enemy mine. Do i whinge about it. No. I chose to steer over it.