Good. Incite change.
Yeah maybe itbis possible to negociate a minor change
1 Like
Semantics Semantics… You know what he meant.
Of course we all know its real, but multipathing is HEAVILY exagerated in WT, especially on modern radars. Multipathing would work from potentially single digit m distances, not 60.
3 Likes
Not with the seekers we have in game though, flying low wont spoof an AIM 120B
Even Skyflash with it’s inverse mono pulse seeker head could hit a target flying lower than 100ft
3 Likes
unwelcome for base bombers
4 Likes
Maybe you need to understand the progress of human electronic technology in the digital age. As early as 1982, the impact of multipath on AIM-7M has been basically eliminated. Because of this, I specifically pointed out that I want to talk about ARH missiles, and SARH will be another topic.
Modern ARH missiles in the game now have filtering technology that can filter out the impact of multipath. In fact, the ground air defense system in the game has implemented multipath filtering technology. Even if the aircraft flies close to the ground, it will not affect your use of ground radar to lock and attack it.
2 Likes
I agree that the stock chaff is necessary, but in the current game, the thin chaff is not very important. You can easily get rid of the FOX3 lock by flying 3 9.
I think if you are going to be hit by an AIM-54, the player who is hit should check if there is skill issue.
AIM-54 can get rid of the lock as long as you are willing to turn in a circle. You don’t even need to take any other actions, just do a 360-degree rotation in place when your RWR is ringing.
It goes a step further, you can easily get rid of the AIM-54 at the last moment through maneuvers. I don’t understand why every time someone talks about it, there are always people saying that AIM-54 is very strong?
The fact is that the gameplay of taking off and sending spam does not pose any threat to any serious game player.
3 Likes
Do you really think that the gameplay of most players flying low to the left at spawn and then forming a huge fur ball in the center of the map is attractive?
After FOX3 was launched, the fur ball problem was indeed temporarily alleviated, but as the community gradually learned how to deal with FOX3, the current situation is actually just a bigger fur ball than before, a huge fur ball with a diameter of about 20 kilometers, and most of the kills in a game will also be obtained in this fur ball. How is this different from the previous SARH FOX1 120m multipath altitude play style?
At present, aerial RB will not get any tactical beyond visual range, let alone technical 39 duels. Is this what you call attractive?
2 Likes
Sorry for being too direct. What I meant is that if players want more dogfighting in the game, you can easily return to the lower SARH missile BR. I play it myself often and this gameplay is indeed attractive.
But with FOX3 being launched for more than a year, is it really good to continue the previous SARH missile gameplay with ARH missiles?
In concept, it is no less than flying the F-4E MiG-23M but still using the gun as main gameplay.
1 Like
Stock chaff is mostly for if gaijin decides to make ARH missiles have unique seekers (like MICA and AIM-120C have currently) to better decoy them when defeating the missile kinematically isn’t possible. It’s currently too easy to defeat ARH by notching, so if that changes then chaff needs to be unlocked from stock in order to counteract that.
1 Like
60m multipath is fine and should stay as it is.
Yes, It enables under powered planes to get something done in the match while still keeping radar missiles a credible threat if the player doesn’t adapt to the enemy.
Removal of multi pathing would be fine but it should only come with a heavy revamp of game mode, battle ratings and match maker.
7 Likes
Realism such as everybody flying 2 inches from the ground in war thunder sim? Yeah no, no multipsth would be more realistic than the multipath we have ingame
3 Likes
Id say, drop it to 40m in ASB, and then work on refinements for ARB to eventually drop it down to 40m in that gamemode too
40m is close enough to IRL for a lot of things to be somewhat accurate, and maybe switch it to a per-missile basis in the future
6 Likes
They have to do more gardening work on the maps before 40m multipathing would be acceptable. Most maps still have way too many unrealistically large trees.
However, I do agree that the multipathing effect should vary depending on the radars and missiles.
2 Likes
Yes for ASB, but no for ARB.
Multi pathing itself is a phenomenon that can happen in real life, so I don’t agree that it should be completely removed, but it is very exaggerated in the game. It should be reduced further at the same time that the inverse monopulse seeker is modeled in the game.
And I hope that people will like maps such as Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Spain even more because they are actually good maps for learning terrain masking.
1 Like
20 meter multipath in some random mobile game
1 Like
Those who advocate the need for multipath claim that “multipath is a real phenomenon.”
That is certainly true.
But it is a terrible insult to think that real-world scholars think of it as envious without doing anything to counter it.
If reality was dominated by multipath like WT, they would have all developed technology to keep aircraft in the multipath area, and would have pushed forward with the development of IR missiles because radar missiles are useless.
But that hasn’t happened, and in reality engineers are competing to develop higher, stealthier, and more powerful radar missiles.
This is proof that multipath is not absolute in modern times like WT (I won’t write the specifics because they have already been shown).
And WT needs to be developed as close to reality as possible based on the submitted real-world materials.
Therefore, multipath should be removed immediately.
If possible, I would like to add a status for each missile indicating whether it has countermeasures against multipath, but if that is not possible, we should no longer trash the top-tier battlefield by pointing out a silly phenomenon for the sake of some SARH users.
Certainly the stock and SARH performance issues need to be resolved, but the solution should never come from multipath.
3 Likes
I can kinda agree but if you’re really about realism then it should be per missile (incl. fox 1’s) that are more modern and have better seeker/radar and arcade should have the locked 60m-100m multi path height. I agree that bvr can be boring for some but most planes that are a br high enough to face fox 3’s have chaff and I have to say notching in this game is easy once you learn it. Plus if they add more maps with actual geography you can terrain mask as well
1 Like