The SACLOS nerf murdered SAM SPAAs in Ground RB, and it is unfair because aircraft at Ground RB get to keep their unrealistic mouse aim which allows any pleb to fly like Tom Cruise, avoiding SAMs efortlessly all while maintaining guidance for PGMs.
IMO, missile physics should apply differently depending on the gamemode in order to keep the missile realism and performance in line with the aircraft. In each gamemode, SAMs should be balanced in a way where dodging them is possible, but difficult.
Arcade - missiles ignore almost all realism mechanics, including air drag and gravity. Missile guidance quality is perfect. This will allow very easy control of missiles which is good for players new for using SAMs. Aircraft at this mode do not compress on high speeds and can pull above 20G, so their movement is highly unpredictable, thus hitting them with a SAM isn’t a trivial task.
Realistic - missiles obey enviromental realism mechanics including gravity and air drag, but ignore mechanical realiam mechanics (ie: their guidance quality should be similar to before update Sky Guardians). Preferably, I’d like to apply full realism to ATGMs on this gamemode, keeping the SACLOS nerf for them specifically, as a nerf for ATGMs (in my opinion) was long overdue (looking at you BMP-1P and Marder A1-). SAMs, on the other hand, need to maintain good control in order to compensate for aircraft having access to the instructor-assisted mouse aim controls. As for air-to-ground SACLOS weapons, I’ll let the developers decide.
Simulator - all realism mechanics apply to all missiles with no exceptions, realism over accesability. Ground SB is a hardcore simulator enviroment, and thus missile performance should match accordingly. Aircraft no longer have access to the easy-mode mouse aim controls, now forced to be limited to cockpit view only and use the joystick. Thus, SAMs in this gamemode are far more powerful than in Ground RB and should also have all possible realism factors apply to them aswell.
And that’s only one of many issues still outstanding on the Red Top. It’s had a couple of buffs this update, but the seeker and aerodynamics are still both substantially under performing.
I cannot answer this poll cause we don’t know how much they’re prioritizing.
We obviously know it’s between “developing AESA & radars for upcoming aircraft” and “developing & fixing all issues with radars, including ground & sea search radars”
Even if you bother to grind out top tier SAMs like the VT1 carriers, ADATS, or even the Pantsir, the pull of the missiles makes you wonder why countries spent millions developing these things
Air RB:
Multipath propagation needs to be a bigger influence on radar missile behavior. Currently missiles act as if they have modern AESA radar guidance and resolution unless you’re really hugging the ground. That in combination with how terrible 16v16s are at the moment, makes top tier air more of an Ace Combat simulator rather than “realistic battles”. Adding what would effectively be an extra 500m of safe altitude would reduce the efficacy of PD radar missile spam and increase the the skill floor.
Not just Radar but their functionality as well, as many aircraft had a 2nd crew member to handle radar functions that are necessary for the aircraft to operate, yet in-game. None of these advantages are present making the aircraft night unplayable
From a realism point of view it should be the opposite (for some missiles at least) Skyflash for example should be able to reliably hit targets as low as 33 m. In game it is useless if the target is below something like 150 m.
Another thing to point out is that Mistrals and Stinger MANPADs were reported and have been going on for several months now sitting there. Basic functionalities are missing from some top tier radars that are available on others.
I’ve made a suggestion post to give 2 seater aircrafts mouse designated radar locks out to their max range (think HMD PD but longer ranged) to simulate the RIO/WSO doing his job for once, but I gotta wait for the post to be approved by mods.
I had originally included more things in the suggestion, such as crew skill changes, spotting advantages, etc… for 2 seater jets, but after waiting a month for it to be approved for discussion, the suggestion was denied due to having “too many suggestions at the same time”…
you’ve got it backwards. Multipath is absurd in-game atm. You BARELY have to be near the ground to gain its protection. Recent testing with the 7M has it completely unable to hit a target flying straight and supersonic until above 95m, which is ABSURD considering its min alt is 5m irl, the AIM-54C is also unable to hit anything sub 95m ish.
its been acknowledged, just like many other bug reports regarding min alt of radar missiles and excessive multipath issues in-game, but still not being acted upon by gaijin.
Theres not much i can say, they design the game, and ver the last few years have proven themselves to just design things however they want whenever they want, for whatever reason they want.
My counterargument to that though would be that even if thats true, water at sea can vary between having much less or much more radar interference based on waves, and that if this was a substantial issue for the missile, it would be a pretty crap self defense tool vs sea skimming missiles, yet its still used in navies across the world.
Even with WT’s simplified modeling, a 1900% increase in min alt is egregious and excessive, PARTICULARLY when you consider that WT planes are flown in 3rd person, allowing for much greater spatial awareness allowing for much easier and safer low latitude flight, and with many extra aids such as the spotting system and now contrails favouring flying low as well. There is no reason why an AFK player flying at 90m from the ground, or even 50m imo, should be completely immune to radar missiles.
To add to that, I am almost certain that radar missiles pre-AIM-7F addition were actually more capable in look down and low alt intercepts than they are now. Multipath was implemented in an excessive manner across all radars and radar guided ordinance.
The current low alt meta is also just toxic imo and wont change until the safe zone sub-100m is removed or at the very least reduced. I understand multipath is a thing, and i dont mind it being in-game, but something like 20m alt, not 95m…
I would point out that a report on Skyflash’s performance explicitly states it can hit targets at an altitude of 100 ft (33 m) over ground or sea:
In addition the original requirements set by the MOD for Skyflash required the contractor to show that the missile would be capable of intercepting targets at 100 ft over both sea and terrain, so it was clearly designed from the very beginning with that capability in mind:
Gaijin needs to curb new vehicle development until they can master the current weapons/radar systems, and add appropriate game modes to accommodate these new systems.
