Depends heavily on the particular match up, and to what level of granularity things are modeled.
As an example, the ALQ-101 carried by the F-4 during 'Nam was able to defend against the SA-2, by prematurely detonating the missile via inducing a “false positive” in the Radio proximity fuse due to a “technical” oversight.
A great channel for providing overviews of systems, and has good detail.
HOJ would also be relatively easy to defeat via maneouvring tho
They can change it after they make trees a normal height and not 50m tall as they are rn.
To be fair they don’t. If we are not talking for AESAs that are immune from the get go (or too resistant, i don’t know…i’ve read both) , even the interference from other planes could make a radar unreliable (not unusuable ) .
It was very common for planes with very powerful radar to make less powerful ones have a bad day.
In WT you have a F-4S storming missiles while a Tomcat floods it… good luck with it irl.
So , no , they are in a good level for a game…but they don’t behave like irl in many levels.
More like they give you an idea what a radar does…generally. It’s not bad for a game though.
For example the interference i’m talking about can happen friendly to friendly… go figure what would happen in a game.
Similar with MP. The real MP , depends on radars… they are things that have anti-sea skimming capabilities and probably won’t give 2 dimes about your MP.
I routinely operate at 30k ft, playing 14.3 without MP is really easy.
I would assume he’s talking about when being stock since he mentions no chaff
Even then… With the AESAs… I found it easier to operate at medium altitude and stay extremely defensive than try to utelise MP to get closer, especially to try to base bomb a few of the early mods.
Radar band interference would be wild if they added it tbh
yeah its why many planes have extra aesa arrays for stuff exactly like this, like the su-57
I agree, multipathing is a sad and boring way to play. Fox 3 jousting by notching is far more fun
People not knowing how to notch at high altitude use this other realistic thing known as multipathing.
Multipathing as well requires you to be active, changing direction to avoid getting top-downed by the missile.
No they don’t they just hit the ground rather than the plane
WOW who could’ve guessed the old low fidelity ENTRY level pack ($6 for each plane) isn’t as detailed as an $80 full fidelity plane it’s ALMOST like it’s meant to be like that.
yeah and tbf after they released the ff modules of some fc planes, like for example mig-29, they actually went back and adjusted the fc mig-29 fm to be more like the ff one. I think they do a decent job with their modules
also (to stay somewhat on topic)
in DCS there is simply no multipathing, which isnt correct either
they did not
they just kept the FC3 flight model and copied it for the FF one
AFAIK, they worked 3d model and avionics.
Your arguments boil down to:
For an actual discussion to form here it would be great if you were to expand on your reasoning regarding these points. You cannot claim to have a solution without explaining why it would actually be better.
What’s important to consider is that War Thunder is primarily a game, then a simulation. The performance of top tier air is already hilariously unrealistic, especially missiles, for good reasons. While it is worthy to strive for realism you cannot center your argument around it, because it might play like shit (you need to explain why it would not).
As for balance problems, please elaborate. The way I see it multipathing is the great equalizer. IR missile slingers are able to close the range using multipathing and stock grinding players are able to do anything by utilizing it. It even allows for dogfights in higher tiers which is plenty of fun. It can be countered by flying high, or shooting IR missiles. This presents a choice of risk/reward to the player and allows for more flexible playstyles.
If it were a year ago before the contrail changes I would be more inclined to agree with you, but currently the meta is high risk high reward by going high. This is of course only considering ARB, perhaps GRB plays differently, but you need to present your arguments for it in that case.
Don’t have top tier, I’ll complain abt it when I get higher tiers, but did u per chance use an AI to write this…?
Even in FC3, there’s no consistency in the modeling.
Despite the Flankers having magical DL, the Eagle doesn’t have any. Furthermore, even in FF, despite being the same weapons, the detailed performance can differ depending on the modules, except missiles.
Have you ever even play DCS?