In case of long range launches carrier can intercept 4 harpoons with guns as soon as they enter its gun range. The only way to sneak missile in is to salvo launch them at around 3-4 km. And even then 1 or 2 missiles that get through often fail to deal significant damage.
Logic seems weird here: ships around carrier fail to protect it completely but carrier itself is invincible thanks to its guns and forces you to utilize weird and unrealistic tactics. Or use 3000lb unguided bombs which get ignored and even instagib carriers.
1 Like
Missiles affected I can name a few of are Aim-120s, PL-8Bs, PL-12s. Multiple others from both aircraft and SAMs are also affected.
because most stuff in this game is modeled of off brochures? and similar specially the modern stuff, but like i said if you have better sources then the manufacturer go ahead and report, the trajectory is wrong yes but max range isnt
Is a Sim Nuclear Ecalation something that is devloped - or at the very least considered - as well?
9 Likes
I’ve had people deadmanning me do no damage so I’m happy with them not working then
but any other time they should do damage
Both, both is good
A few days ago I played two matches that highlighted a noticeable difference in how rewards are given across modes. In a 36 minute Nuke Escalation win where I placed first, I earned 59,774 RP with a 50 percent booster, which is about 1,660 RP per minute. In an Air RB match I lost with only two kills, I earned 11,503 RP with the same booster, which is roughly 2,875 RP per minute.
I want to stress that I enjoy Nuke Escalation very much. It is one of my favorite modes. However, the reward structure makes long and successful matches feel far less efficient than short ones. My point is specifically about rewards: time spent in battle should play a more consistent role across modes so that players who enjoy Nuke Escalation are not at a disadvantage when progressing through the tech tree.[/img]
@BVV_d Either bringing Nuclear Escalation elements into Enduring confrontation, or bringing Nuclear Escalation to Simulator entirely would be huge.
We’re coming up on 4 years of no maps added to EC Air Simulator.
8 Likes
…or any other actual and factual improvements of the game mode… = (
5 Likes
The fact 2 out of 4 missiles on the Chinese premium su-30 are currently unusable is ridiculous though. Same thing with EVERY AIM-120 variant. I can get more kills rn with a full loadout of R-73/Aim9s more than 120s or Pl-12s due to the bug
1 Like
Funs over guys. Bomber will become useless again.
Just out of curiosity, since the TIS MA and Su-8 got their damage models reworked, any plans to expand it to other similarly sized twin engine aircraft such as the Me 410s, Beaufighters, P-61 etc.?
4 Likes
Yes well I didn’t want to make the reply include all similarly sized twin engine aircrafts, the general idea of what planes i meant should be clear 👍🏻
1 Like
Yeah, but the thing is that stuff like the P-61 and Beaufighters are technically not bombers.
But the Mossie and Bigrand are and the fact that neither were inlcuded in the first round is very annoying actually
Neither the TIS MA nor Su-8 are bombers, yet had a damage model rework. Thus i would like to know if other twin engine strike aircraft and fighters are going to get reworks.
Edit: But regarding the Mossie, if the bomber variant got a rework, it would be a little illogical to not rework the fighters and strike aircraft variants too.
1 Like
huh?
I’ve had zero issues
I’ve seen the proxy bug happen
but not often enough to actually mean anything to me
2 Likes
If you’re doing this to bombers, you need to continue to rework their gameplay.
Increase their standard spawn height, Remove Artificial spread on gunners, Remove nametags (forcing the use and increased introduction of radar aircraft) and make all maps have destructible airfields
1 Like