Flare (the smaller one) at current version is just insanely effective, they really don’t have any preparation time to reach their highest temperature, this just making every sidewinder without IRCCM is just like AIM-9B (others IDK, haven’t unlocked yet) you can just missed you target 500m ahead just because they fire their flare last second and it is no point to seperate the small caliber from the larger caliber one if they just performed the same
Ok.
What… exactly is your point
They do not perform the same.
The seekers are undeniably underperforming, likely on purpose. The devs probably want it this way to make the game more accessible
3 Likes
Yes they are currently, smaller flare is so effective right now that make no different between them
No, if anything, missies should be more likely to go for flares.
They don’t though. It’s not as noticeable with the early IR missiles, but it is very evident with the more modern ones.
And it’s even easier to see the difference between BOL IR and Large CMs.
As to why this is you would have to have a dev tell you. I can speculate and say it’s to make the learning curve for missile and CM interaction more approachable, but it’s just conjecture.
Not from a reality standpoint.
Spoiler
2 Likes
Okay, it has a 58-80% chance of holding a track on an after burning plane while flaring, that’s a very wide window, with an average of 69%, that’s not a whole lot.
No.
It says it will consistently decoy against a mil power target outside of 10° of direct behind.
It has less than 50% chance of missing on a mil power target from directly behind( or within 10° of the tail.) and that decreases to as low as 20% so 1/5 it does not decoy.
It says it does not decoy on an afterburning target at all.
If you take what this is saying in-game, if you do not reduce throttle out of AB, you should get hit every time. The game fails immediately at that step.
If you go further and shoot 100 times from directly behind, the missile should hit more than 50%(and potentially as high as 80% of the time) against a target at 100% throttle even if it flares. I’m not saying I’ve done the test myself, but I would hazard to guess it doesn’t meet this metric either.
I’m not saying this is a necessarily a bad thing, but saying it is wholly ‘correct as is’ is not true to life.
In the game is much lower than that, I had try shooting a F-4 using 9p within 1km behind and it also using afterburner, it still can flare my missile without shutting it afterburner
There is a third solution.
Heat signature overhaul that would make aircraft heat signatures more realistic and largely hotter than they are now.
Then model IR missiles more realistically to react to those IR signatures (like 9Ls should ignore flares if the target is on reheat)
1 Like
Can’t wait to not be able to flare even more in a harrier 😿
Properly modeled heat sigs would actually fix the Harrier heat issue, let alone if we got directional exhaust which would allow the Harrier to block rear-aspect shots via a viff
Properly modeled, yes. Not entirely convinced that harriers would not be, unintentionally or not, given the short end of the stick.
Yeah… They probably would be