The issue is per-missile [which is 30 - 40 meters for AIM-120C5] is that’s in games where you’re in first person view where 40 meters looks like a lot.
In 3rd person view 60 meters looks less than 40 meters.
Multipath should never be removed entirely. If anything multipath should depend on the individual radar and missile combinations, however Gaijin doesn’t model that stuff currently.
The multipath threshold could certainly be moved even lower, but not as long as maps are filled with 30-40m tall trees. There should also should be more maps with complex terrain as cover. Maps like Pyrenees, Rocky Pillars and Mysterious Valley are amazing, because they allow players to approach the battlefield without constantly being tracked and they have opportunities to evade missiles by using the terrain.
If you desperately want to do BVR, nobody is stopping you from climbing and engaging the other BVR players.
2 Likes
Eradicate multipathing.
Self report.
1 Like
100% true and based.
If possible, I would like to add a status for each missile indicating whether it has countermeasures against multipath,
Even if multipath is removed, there is nothing to prevent you from doing dogfights if you want to, notching, drag, terrain masking, all the means for approaching remain.
On the other hand, after I win the BVR, there is no way to fight someone who uses a multipath barrier. All missiles, including the AMRAAM, MICA, and R-77, are blocked by multipath and are unable to cause any damage. If I did not take the foolish step of using multipath, which is unbecoming of Gen4, the enemy missiles fired from behind the multipath barrier would ignore all energy differences and turn the tables, causing me to lose. Otherwise, I have no choice but to give up the battle and abandon my allies.
Is this really a battle of Gen 4 fighters?
Are they going to throw the high altitude performance of the F-15, the speed performance of the Typhoon, and the many R-77s on the Su-30 into the gutter and just crawl on the ground?
It’s time to encourage Gen4 fighter jets to fight in a way that is appropriate for Gen4.
4 Likes
Not only are there plenty of planes that are unable to properly notch and terrain mask, not all planes are on equal footing and a lot of the time, these planes have no choice except for multipathing.
If maps had more complex terrain and trees weren’t so massive, sure, they could terrain mask (I mean, they already are trying to do that, as the 60m multipath threshold means that you have to adjust to slopes very quickly), but as it stands, maps tend to be mostly flat with 30-40m tall trees and next to no cover to make use of.
You still have IR missiles and guns.
War Thunders gameplay hasn’t really evolved beyond late props/early jets. People have been saying this ever since missiles and supersonic planes have been introduced.
- Matches are still 6v6 or 8v8 usually
- Countermeasures are still pretty primitive
- There still is no ECM
- Most maps aren’t large enough
The AI has been neglected and turned irrelevant (sidenote hidden)
The Planes only scale up to the korean era and rarely ever do anything, even though they have the capacity to actually attack players and AI in general has turned into actual SL/RP pinatas (on non-EC maps at least), as it mostly ignores the players. Battlefield AA doesn’t attack unless provoked, bases have no AA in high tier and the removal of AI v AI kill ticket drain means the planes can be completely ignored.
There's only one spawn location for each team (sidenote hidden)
The carriers and additional airfields could allow for more spread out matches, but Gaijin is removing the ability for naval planes to spawn on the carriers and apparently they still haven’t thought of giving subsonic high BR planes the ability to spawn on the forward airfields.
Multiplayer scenarios (maps with special objectives), EC maps and even basic objectives have been neglected and in many cases rendered non-functional (sidenot hidden)
Airfields cannot be destroyed in high tier and I’m not sure if objectives like “help AI capture location” can even be fulfilled or if they actually end up doing something after being completed and usually matches end before the attacking AI can even get close to reaching their main objective.
You can tell that the game evolved beyond what was initially planned by just looking at how most maps are constructed and how small a lot of them are. The terrain is very simple and doodads (buildings, trees, etc) are not scaled properly and in many cases not even placed right as most of it was literally just eye-candy.
Before SARH missiles were introduced people had no incentive to fly as low as possible and if next to nobody flies that low, well, there is no need to work on more complex terrain and better doodad scaling and placement.
Spoiler
If WVR combat wasn’t appropriate for Gen4 and newer, then why do these planes still carry guns and WVR missiles?
1 Like
Nobody is forcing you down to the deck to dogfight them though, you can just stay high and let them come to you, go for some other higher target or just take the low flying target out when they are vulnerable. Yet you want to force the other people to always play your fight.
Low flying targets are usually easy kills anyway even with multipathing.
1 Like
They could mention the presence (or lack) of an (inverse) monopulse seeker on the statcards of the missiles, as that is the main way multipathing is being dealt with IRL.
In-game all (S)ARH missiles behave as if they had an inverse monopulse seeker currently, which is why pre-AIM-7M SARH missiles can properly track at altitudes below 400m in WT.
Huh? I do not play the F-14s…
I just disagree about making planes unplayable.
Removing multipathing will not be the win you think it would be.
It definitely is far more attractive than the infernal loop that is BVR.
And I play the strongest plane for BVR in the game.
You don’t need to join the furball if you don’t want to; simply climb and go play BVR, if that’s your jam.
However, do not force other players to adhere to where they’re very poorly equiped to fight against the meta planes.
Also, if you think failing to notching with a 4-corner RWR such as the Mirage F1 is skill issue, then your opinion automatically drops in value.
You’re just setting up for the F-14s to be even more stupid than they already are. They’ll just bully you out of the map.
You misunderstand me. You think removing multipathing will lead to the F-14s being 13.3 (uptiered). That means you unironically die to Phoenixes and complain about it. That self-reporting because not even Batman could make me admit I died to a phoenix while being aware it was coming for me.
Oh, you’re actually even thicker than I thought you would be.
I rarely die to AIM-54s, nor is that my point.
I, however, do have the ability to understand that removing multipathing would affect its balance versus other planes that are poorly equiped to deal with it. It would be absolutely uptiered.
There is no plane that the F-14 faces that is “poorly equipped” to deal with it.
2 Likes
Mirage F1s, MiG-21s (except for Bison), Jaguars.
And that’s just from the top of my head; there are planes with very few countermeasures and even poorer avionics which make it AWFUL to fly.
Do you even play the game? I’m beginning to think that you don’t.
The F-14 itself has poor avionics and low CM counts. The F-14A that fights these is awful to fly below 5600m.
The Mirage F1 is not poorly equipped and MiG-21s (except for the Bison) and Jaguars don’t face the F-14
1 Like
Russians arh missiles irl according to their exporter have a min alt of 20m, which would be nice
It’s absolutely poorly equiped. 4-corner RWR with no launch or launch warning. Same as the MiG-23s with the piss-poor SPO-10s.
And I stand corrected, I misrembered the Jaguar’s BR. I apologize.