True, I forgot to record yesterday a couple of instances where I fired some of these missiles that were flared away like they were an AIM-9L. And another where I easily one flared an R-73 that would previously track me no problem.
But this issue is so blatantly evident and consistent (happens every time) that I am amazed that almost no one is complaining about it.
You don’t need to pre-flare gatewidth missiles anymore, and if you can flare an AIM-9L, you can pretty much do the same for the R-73/magic-2 and the others. These missiles will also switch tracking to a missile launched by the target even at short ranges in rear-ish aspects, just like the 9L would.
The IRCCM does seem to work at least, but to questionable effect. The most notable example was PL-8B which was quite easy to one-flare from within 2km. The Magic 2 felt as flare resistant as the Aim-9L up until ~700m. Even shooting slightly side-aspect made the seekers very vulnerable.
The evasion techniques and testing methodology was ad-hoc, but I still think it clearly demonstrates that these missiles are way more susceptible to flares than expected.
They all have similar flare resistance because the seeker after fov reduction works similarly between all except the R-27T/ET.
But clearly, there is something very wrong with gatewidth IRCCM, the IRCCM itself is working because you can see the FOV shrinking in the sensor UI in the replays, but they get easily flared regardless.
I made a new bug report with @InverseBits video. There are a few old bug reports related to the issue that were either ignored or straight-up dismissed. Hopefully this video is enough to grab the devs attention. @Gunjob can you take a look at this issue so it isn’t ignored again?
Hey, sorry another mod closed it. From reviewing your test footage it does appear to bite flares. But with this stuff we need replay files etc so we can review in sensor view.
Reason being is its very difficult to ascertain if the flare was in FOV without being able to see the FOV of the seeker which is much easier to see in sensor view. Gate width IRCCM doesn’t have a flare rejection capacity more over the reduced FOV makes it less likely a flare will enter the FOV of the missile, however if a flare does enter the FOV the missile is unlikely to reacquire the original target.
So simply; if we can’t see the FOV of the seeker we can’t make a judgement on if the flare was in FOV or not.
Its pretty evident that being able to consistently flare them at 1km away in rear aspect should not happen like it is shown in the video. Why can’t the devs themselves take 5 minutes to test it?
Feels like they expect the community to make a PowerPoint presentation of the issue and also provide the exact cause and code fix.
This is their job, not ours. I am not being paid, they are.
I meant the devs, not the moderators, the fact that they rely on the community and moderators to find and help to fix a lot of game issues is ridiculous.
