chat GPT aah post
2 Likes
the best example are the 3 different API’s that are used for missile guidance
(and no its not like every type of missile has its own API)
Yeah if Gaijin got rid of multipathing, I’d quit top tier. Its the only way to stock grind planes without Chaff. Otherwise you just feed yourself to the enemy until you get enough RP to get Chaff and that’s no fun.
5 Likes
The second multipathing gone its gonna be impossible for certain planes to defend themselves for example low counter measure planes like F/A-18E become even harder to play and the whole toptier meta will devolve into BVR meta which not every toptier can do and would be incredibly boring
unless you find climbing to 30K ft firing missiles then landing fun
MP is a neccersarry game feature to keep the game balanced other wise youll be stuck in whatever’s meta and nothing else will be playable so anything that cant climb well will die
-1
2 Likes
it wouldnt be so bad if chaff did something.
chaff feels like trying to stop a nuclear meltdown with a super soaker
There is one critical factor irl because of which planes dont fly at sub 50m height from ground, which is lacking from game.
That is random birds being sucked by your engines and ultimately killing it.
Add chaff to everyone and remove multipath for higher tier missiles.
It doesn’t matter if chaff does something or not if you have no chaff.
But also, Chaff is effective when paired with proper counter-missile manuevers, like Notching. To be fair
yeah you could do that but stock planes would only have 4 missiles 2 IR and 2 radar which they cant compete in BVR which is all toptier would become there would be no WVR so F18 would have zero chance as it cant BVR due to not having the FM
its not 100% guarnteed to always notch tho to be fair its a FOX-3 it can relock itself some times
I don’t think I’ve ever had a missile relock me after Notching. If you have an issue with a missile relock, you probably haven’t notched enough
it can happen tho rare its situational if you un notch to early before the missile has passed it can relock last second and hit you
Honestly against a good radar a perfect notch and spamming out chaff does nothing a lot of the time.
Ive only lost lock on a target notching correcly ONCE while using the F/A-18 a and CF-188. those radars are perfection but if you cant go to the 60m alt safe zone there is nothing you can do
2 Likes
I think modern SAM should get a rework of last generation ground-to-air missiles ARH seeker, because most of them are thought to face multipathing and targets such as heli’s.
Could be just a ‘system’ update and not freak out as soon as a target gets under 30m from the ground, and have a way better ht rate against heli’s or hovering jets using the micro-doppler effect (Doppler but with blades or engines blade).
Most toptier SPAA uses vertical launched ARH missiles and some such as the Type-03 or Aster-30 litteraly never scored a hit on a heli unless a miracle happens.
Here are a couple ways modern SAM uses to hit a target close to the ground.
AESA radars with fine angular resolution
many small transmit/receive elements let the system resolve direct vs. reflected returns as genuinely separate angles rather than blending them, directly attacking the root cause of glint.
Frequency agility
rapidly hopping frequency changes the interference pattern the multipath reflection creates pulse to pulse, decorrelating it so it averages out over the tracking window instead of producing a stable false angle.
Adaptive sidelobe cancellation (ASLC) / Constant False Alarm Rate (CFAR) processing
actively nulls energy arriving from the reflection’s angle and statistically rejects clutter-level returns, both used explicitly on systems like Type 03 Chu-SAM’s AESA.
Micro-Doppler / blade-flash discrimination
Is used to target helicopters mainly. Doppler works by supressing sationnary stuff to only see the targets and can work without being ‘jammed’ by scanning the whole regionnal topography. But what about a stationnary helicopter such as a hovering Mi-28NM by exemple ? Well Micro-Doppler is the Doppler effect for rotor blades, compressor faces, or propellers. Each add their own oscillating signature distinct from the fuselage’s overall closing velocity. The most exploitable form is blade-flash: brief, high-amplitude spikes generated when a rotor blade presents its broadside to the radar, recurring at a rate tied to blade count and RPM, which gives seekers a near-fingerprint for classifying rotorcraft or drones even when bulk Doppler is near zero, as with a hovering helicopter otherwise indistinguishable from ground clutter.
Steep terminal engagement geometry
missiles (Fox 3 especially, once on their own seeker) generally close from above or a steep dive angle rather than skimming the surface themselves, which geometrically separates direct and reflected paths far better than a shallow ground-radar look.
Used in air vs air in WT and IRL to get almost a 100% sure shot.
Sadly this would make tinnier map impossible to play with air, unless you bring almost only chaff. But as a postive thing, it will make CAS way harder, and people will have to use the whole map that was hardly worked on.
Here is a table of what I could find about toptier missiles for this.
Sadly it is still very classified, or I jst haven’t looked down enough. If you have any info, please tell me what to correct, and please state sources because anyone can say anything !
Spoiler
| Missile | AESA seeker | Frequency agility | ASLC/CFAR | Micro-Doppler/blade-flash | Steep terminal geometry |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aster-30 (Block 1NT) | Probably doesn’t — Ka-band active seeker, not a true AESA array | It does — explicitly stated | It’s said to — clutter suppression, not named CFAR/ASLC | Classified/unknown | It does — PIF-PAF is the signature feature, 60g terminal maneuvers |
| Chu-SAM (base Type 03) | It does — AESA seeker inherited from AAM-4 lineage | It’s said to — implied by AESA, not stated outright | Classified/unknown | Classified/unknown | Classified/unknown |
| Chu-SAM Kai | It does — explicitly stated, upgraded for low-RCS detection | It’s said to — implied by resilience to jamming | It’s said to — same, generic ECCM language | Classified/unknown | Classified/unknown |
| AMRAAM-ER | Probably doesn’t — same seeker family as C-7, mechanically scanned | It’s said to — improved ECCM language | It’s said to | Classified/unknown | Probably doesn’t — no thrust vectoring disclosed |
| AIM-120C-7 | Probably doesn’t — confirmed mechanically scanned array, not AESA | It’s said to — improved ECCM with jamming detection | It’s said to | Classified/unknown | Probably doesn’t |
| 9M317MA (Buk-M3) | Classified/unknown — active radar homing head (ARGSN), AESA not confirmed | Classified/unknown | Classified/unknown | Classified/unknown | It’s said to — high-g thrust vector control claimed |
| CAMM | Classified/unknown — solid-state GaN seeker, not confirmed as scanning AESA | Classified/unknown | It does — clutter rejection explicitly stated | Classified/unknown | It’s said to — thrust vectoring control |
| CAMM-ER | Classified/unknown — same seeker family as CAMM | Classified/unknown | It does — pulsed Doppler with clutter rejection stated | Classified/unknown | It’s said to |
| FM-3000 | Classified/unknown — very little open-source detail on this one at all | Classified/unknown | Classified/unknown | Classified/unknown | Classified/unknown |
| I-Derby ER | Classified/unknown — software-controlled RF seeker, AESA not confirmed | It does — software-defined, explicitly adaptable | It’s said to — ECCM stated but not named CFAR/ASLC | Classified/unknown | Classified/unknown |
-
Keep multipathing as a meta
-
Change multipathing for toptier anti-air if sources/proof shows it can counter
-
Allow from a given generation of missiles a way to deal with multipathing (ground & air launched missiles)
0
voters
Keep in mind there is still different way to deal with anti-air missiles.
Did you write this with AI?
Its not just top tier or just SAMs, imo, ALL missiles should be given historically accurate minimum engagement altitudes
a couple of the small description because my english isn’t good enough to explain in 2 sentences such difficult concept.
1 Like
Not you lol, I was asking OP. I will say though to be careful doing that, because you’re going to offload the actual language education and not be able to get better yourself.
1 Like
Idk, I don’t play a lot of toptier jets, but I think it’s too messy no have to notch all missiles, it implies a drastic change of the gameplay so I don’t want to go too much on a subject I don’t know a lot about.
I exclusively notch all top tier missiles and Ive not had any issues. I rarely go below 20’000 ft. Heck, even in realtively weak airframes like the Tornado F3 (both 12.0 and 13.0). Im rarely below 10k ft
So its fine, and it would go a long way to helping to actual balance certain aspects of the game.
1 Like