Big problem with Harrier was it couldn’t get out of the way. With BOL not being properly modelled as a distributed countermeasure you were basically just putting heat signatures right behind you whenever you deployed whereas the base 60 would launch away from the aircraft. The original reason aside, I don’t quite understand the long process for reverting the nerf still. If at least the devs would come out and say why exactly they don’t want to it would help - the lack of transparency is honestly worse than the issue itself.
They just don’t want to touch it and are using “a lack of sources” as an excuse to bury their heads in the sand.
“Submitted as a suggestion” just directly translate to “we probably won’t be implemented anytime soon but we’ll keep it in mind in case we decide something underperforming in the future”
1 Like
Imo, the “proper” way to model it in-game would be to give it even higher intensity than large caliber flares, but keep the current short duration it has. That’d be the “best” way to model a pyrotechnic countermeasure that works by blocking out the view of the aircraft with a large IR screen.
They could make it 2x “brighter” than the large caliber flares, but retain the current duration, which would basically make it a sidegrade to a large caliber flare instead of a downgrade from a normal flare.
Graph of current countermeasure modelling for reference:
5 Likes
Countermeasures do have a function in the code to act as a cloud. Chaff uses it. I see no reason why using the same intensity as a regular while set as a “cloud” (which would therefore have a wider area of effect, being much better against anything with gate width IRCCM especially) would be an issue.
100% on keeping the current shorter duration though.
4 Likes
Thatd actually be a great idea, hadnt thought of that.
I wonder if that can be modelled and tested in custom missions…
1 Like
Even just failing that.
Reverting most of the previous nerfs would be a good starting point and restoring them to largely standard calibre figures. With specific buffs coming afterwards to both flare and chaff performance
1 Like
Should be possible. I’m yet to convince someone to do it though and i’m not knowledgeable enough to do it myself.
You’d just need to create a custom “rocket” (countermeasures are rockets) with those changes.
Fourth now with the addition of the F-2
1 Like
oh yeah, i also forgot about su-34 so it’s really fifth
The 2 extra magic 2 arrived after reports were made after the introduction of 5f. 5f also arrived years before the MICA, so I do t think there’s any basis to consider it in the addition of the plane. Or they would have added the 5F along side MICA in 2024
Fair enough. I don’t think it qualifies exactly like the EFT and other planes in this situation tho
Not as gigantic as starting with only 4 missiles and flares but no chaffs that is the current stock grind. Or the massive flight model nerfs that you have to grind with modifications.
True I suppose, now it’s about convincing gaijin instead of us being given another 420k rp jet that’s functionally identical because the game isn’t ready for METEOR/ASRAAM yet.
What they could do is just make the AESA modification specifically more expensive. Like 4x that of a tier 4 mod so it’s not a new jet but it’s still effort. There’s no need for another identical airframe.
The 5F was added in the same update that add the J-8F and official statement that the J-8F is planned to get ARH in the future
So it’s not unreasonable to assume the exact same would apply to the Mirage 5Fs intro
now if only the typhoon gets a missile that can actually launch from beyond 60 degrees…
The meteor and asraam should be able to, but amraam? It’s probably stuck with having to be launched within 60 degrees of target (+ its really terrible off bore anyways)
Yes. I’m not here to say that I want an entirely new aircraft to research just for AESA, I’m just really pessimistic about how they will handle this. I’d love to be proven wrong in the future tho.
Then the same could be applied to the typhoon. Devs might decide to lock AESA and say meteors or ASRAAM behind a new mod for next year (I’m really playing devils advocate here, don’t get the impression that’s what I want)
1 Like
Should we expect the meteor to be good at high offshore tho ? Maybe for very long range but I would be surprised it’d turn more than AMRAAM
They might, but would still be sooner rather than later and would come with far more than just AESA and new missiles. Such as AMK, striker II and maybe even the new cockpit.
Let alone weapons like spear.
It would have to be truly worth the upgrade
no it’s gonna be terrible off bore. I just meant since its seekerhead (deritative of mica em seekerhead) has no angular launch limits, it should also have no angular launch limits
1 Like
Being slower off the rails it might gain the advantage of a smaller turning radius but I think the key point is that AMRAAM expends most of it’s energy in said turn. Meteor would not. Whilst it probably wouldn’t be WVR worthy HOBS. It would certainly be far more forgiving than AMRAAM is in BVR combat
1 Like
this would be one of the few times id hope an aircraft doesnt get a new cockpit
i just think the big ipad and no hud is ugly