Are there any plans to increase the range at which TGP’s can be used effectively? Or ways we can employ munitions at further distances like those with IR+GNSS guidance?
Currently the 30km limit is very restrictive, especially if you want to use long range munitions and engage the long range SAM sites.
Or how about any plans for introducing some form of LOAL for the relevant munitions for use in NE? Whether that be for IR terminal homing, MmW, or any other similar LOAL method.
What your talking about is ground detection and communication to the pilot through Radio.
That’s not Data link.
But early mig29 9.12 we’re not equipped with these systems
We are actually considering a rather radical solution: temporarily banning ramjet-powered anti-ship missiles (such as the Kh-31 and similar models) in Escalation mode. The reason is that, right now, these weapons are simply too effective.
Alternatively, we could wait for the arrival of ships equipped with more effective surface-to-air missile systems for the higher Escalation tiers (these are currently in active development).
To be honest, I’d rather not implement a ban; this is practically the only part of the game where these missiles actually serve a meaningful purpose.
Now that Nuclear Escalation is an official mode, could we see high tier aircraft receive limited stock loadouts of ARMs or guided munitions? While I love playing Nuclear Escalation, I feel like it’s fairly annoying that you aren’t able to consistently grind in the mode as a stock plane. Currently, players only receive dumb bombs and rockets which require players to either wait for another player to clear out SPAAs, or try rushing the SPAAs which ends up with the player being shotdown. Giving players stock ARMs would open up another way of stock grinding, and I believe this will increase the playercount for Nuclear Escalation.
This sounds like a fabulous idea. As a fellow rotor head I have always wondered, if we will ever get to see/play logistic helicopters.
Will RIM-116 come to Nimitz for better protection against such missiles?
And will the effectiveness of subsonic sea skimmers be improved?
Any future plans for adding aerial refuelling for the larger NE maps?
Is there any chance that this feature will come with an update to the minimap.
Sth akin to what has been show in your teasers/trailers on YouTube?
Google says Su-27 cannot directly datalink to other jets missile because missile datalink is hardcoded to specific launching jets radar. But it does say they can share radar target coordinates
What about Planes like the Eurofighter or Tornado which currently have only the AGM-84C when they could use the AARGM, seeing as we have the AARGM-ER in game, is that a Idea you follow or nah?
Uh oh, i guess people were correct on some things after all.
I nearly fainted from happiness reading this. Absolutely wonderful. It was getting silly how there was little to no damage from HE. Great job! 👍🏻
#MakeHEGreatAgain
Amazing, soon people will have a reliable but detrimental solution to taking down bombers. If their own aircraft is critically damaged for example.
In reality, GNSS won’t help when attacking a newly detected target (as in the scenario we are discussing) rather than one that has been previously scouted. This is because—as a reminder—the missile’s seeker cannot determine the distance to the target; it can only measure direction.
In the game, GNSS remains active if the missile is within a few kilometers of the target when the signal is lost. This can be observed by firing multiple missiles at a single target in the test range:
The first missile will reach and destroy the target, while the others will still impact the target area based on the projected trajectory.
I tend to disagree with this, at least for the helicopter tree I have the most experience with (USA). Just to list a few examples:
At the low bracket is the AH-1F. This has TOW missiles with a range of 3.75km (though they get super wobbly past ~3.5km), and this is longer than the range of the shilkas (they engage at ~3km IIRC). There is also the AH-1W but this would also be able to be uptiered to the middle bracket. This has Hellfires and APKWS guided rockets which significantly outrange the shilkas. Both of these also have an IRCM system that makes all air to air IR missiles currently in game unable to lock them, except gatewidth IRCCM missiles from point blank range. And at these BRs, radar missiles are not a threat.
At the middle bracket is the AH-64D. This does get outranged by the OSAs, but Hellfires have IOG, so you can mark the OSA on the map, launch the missile from behind a hill letting it guide in on IOG, then pop up to lase it for the last 5 seconds or so of flight. This also has the same IRCM system that makes it mostly immune to IR missiles.
At the top bracket is the AH-64E. It has 16km range JAGMs which outrange the 2s6s and OSAs it can fight, and they are also fire and forget. It has a DIRCM system that makes it completely immune to all IR missiles (though judging by what BVV_d said, this is likely to change soon). Radar missiles do become a threat at this BR, but they are very easily notched.
PLS I BEG dont leave SIM EC out of this, with all existing things that has been added, it can easily be worked on SIM EC :(
Because our friendly Google doesn’t know that su27 has been modernized.
For him only su30mkk and ongoing are equipped with this system.
@BVV_d Hey, loving the improvements to Nuclear Escalation.
Are there any plans to bring this mode to the Simulator difficulty?
But the whole point of adding GPS guidance to the missile is so it can guide to target even if signal is lost early. Modern passive radar systems like those on western fighter RWR have been able to geolocate radar signals for decades now.
How would the structural strength of the components be affected?
Is it such that it would work that they take more damage if they get hit, a bit like a damage multiplier, after it have been affected by the fire?
Or would it work in a way, that the maximum strength the plane can support gets worse, such that it is able to pull less G’s, or that with time the airframe could break because it passes the weight it can support?
Secondly, to overall improve the damage model of aircraft in the game, has the separation of the structure of the airframe and the skin of the aircraft been considered as an option?
And bring them down the BR, at least to 6.0-8.3 bracket without SAM sites but with Flak sites that will have radars and spotlights that will point at your plane and indicate that you are being locked by a radar.
