UnknownMurder Posted August 3, 2016 Posted August 3, 2016 Remember the top hit game, "Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes"? Well, this is the exact thing I'm going to suggest. Pull out your book, pull out your wirecutters/snippers, pull out your brain. We're going to defuse this bomb. One wrong snip? The bomb blows. 5 code attempts? The bomb blows. Touched the wrong color? The bomb blows. I don't have to explain this. Lot of you seen this in movies. It's pretty much it. Why do I suggest this? Right now, the way we can disable our Tank Transfer Valve bombs is under 5 seconds quick take it apart which some people believes RPly they defused the bomb. I'll tell you this, it's NOT that easy.
Nanako Posted August 3, 2016 Posted August 3, 2016 i've seen a better bomb defusing system in some other server, might port it
Alberyk Posted August 3, 2016 Posted August 3, 2016 I am fully sure that tg has syndicate bombs that you can defuse in the same manner, and it also applies to the merc nuke.
Guest Complete Garbage Posted August 3, 2016 Posted August 3, 2016 For a bomb as simple as a valve hooked up to a signaller? It is that simple. I do agree, however, that there should be some antagonist or late-stage R&D options for more complex bomb rigs.
Carver Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 Adding more military-grade bomb varieties for the various antagonists/ERT/etcetera with such a system would be nice, but the current tank transfer bombs are fine as is. If someone has had the chance to defuse your tank transfer bomb, you're not a very apt bomber then considering you can remotely trigger those, unlike the nuke ops' namesake. Also I guarantee that if you add more types of bombs that require wires then ERT will just c4 them all, so anyone who tries to implement such devices should keep that into account.
UnknownMurder Posted August 4, 2016 Author Posted August 4, 2016 Adding more military-grade bomb varieties for the various antagonists/ERT/etcetera with such a system would be nice, but the current tank transfer bombs are fine as is. If someone has had the chance to defuse your tank transfer bomb, you're not a very apt bomber then considering you can remotely trigger those, unlike the nuke ops' namesake. Also I guarantee that if you add more types of bombs that require wires then ERT will just c4 them all, so anyone who tries to implement such devices should keep that into account. That doesn't make sense? C4ing a bomb and bombs defused?
Carver Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 That doesn't make sense? C4ing a bomb and bombs defused? A classic ERT tactic when they didn't want to risk defusing a nuke was to circumvent that by C4ing it. It was understandably patched iirc because it was somewhat awful, and that's why I'm mentioning it here so it doesn't end up an issue for any new iterations of defusable bombs.
Nanako Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 That doesn't make sense? C4ing a bomb and bombs defused? A classic ERT tactic when they didn't want to risk defusing a nuke was to circumvent that by C4ing it. It was understandably patched iirc because it was somewhat awful, and that's why I'm mentioning it here so it doesn't end up an issue for any new iterations of defusable bombs. I'm not sure that's a bad thing. Destroying a nuke before it explodes is a legitimate tactic to prevent explosion. they require things to be just right to start the chain reaction
SierraKomodo Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 That doesn't make sense? C4ing a bomb and bombs defused? A classic ERT tactic when they didn't want to risk defusing a nuke was to circumvent that by C4ing it. It was understandably patched iirc because it was somewhat awful, and that's why I'm mentioning it here so it doesn't end up an issue for any new iterations of defusable bombs. I'm not sure that's a bad thing. Destroying a nuke before it explodes is a legitimate tactic to prevent explosion. they require things to be just right to start the chain reaction For a nuke, yes. However, for other forms of emplaced bombs, C4ing it should make it explode as if the bomb itself went off.
Carver Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 That doesn't make sense? C4ing a bomb and bombs defused? A classic ERT tactic when they didn't want to risk defusing a nuke was to circumvent that by C4ing it. It was understandably patched iirc because it was somewhat awful, and that's why I'm mentioning it here so it doesn't end up an issue for any new iterations of defusable bombs. I'm not sure that's a bad thing. Destroying a nuke before it explodes is a legitimate tactic to prevent explosion. they require things to be just right to start the chain reaction It was a bad thing because it was no effort to completely negate the only real diplomatic advantage of Nuclear Operatives, as the Nuke was the only thing that would make people listen to them.
DatBerry Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 Bay had a assembly system that we should totally work on, i think polaris might have finished it. Its similar to the modular weapons fowl is working on but i cant seem to find the page, you make a frame and depending on size you can fit more assemblies, you get to wire which assembly to which and diffuse it by cutting the right power, if its a bomb you can anchor it to the ground and have it explode by either signals or promixty sensor, you can also make a assembly that tases anyone nearby
Guest Complete Garbage Posted August 9, 2016 Posted August 9, 2016 I read about that on the Bay wiki. It's something I'd actually be quite interested in seeing.
Recommended Posts