And here I thought Sim players wanted more true to life gameplay and the multipathing change would facilitate that. Weird…
Check the statcards, the whiners mostly come from RB, because the aren’t capable of looking which section this is in
3 Likes
This change basically killed dog fights at 11.7, which was previously a great place to find some nice fights away from the top tier 9M spam. Fighting on the red side the only thing blues do is try to get you with a 7F in a headon, if you avoid it, they die in one turn, I literally can’t remember the last time I had to defend against an IR missile at that tier.
1 Like
no rather change the players to a fixed 8v8
In simulator battles?
You shouldn’t have a problem to find smaller games in SB. With the lobby system you can even exactly choose whether the game has to many players.
1 Like
I’m going to highly oversimplify it here, but at props the skill you need is energy management and relative positioning. Generally, there is a lot of time to react at these lower BRs and requires a high amount of technical finesse to get your guns on target long enough for a kill.
When it comes to higher BRs, missiles sharply decrease the technical finesse needed to get a kill, which is where I observe many “no skill” claims come from. Now, it’s not how well can you aim, it’s how well you position yourself. The time to react is much lower and the space required to “be safe” leaps from 1km to over 20km from other planes. Many players do not like having to observe a safety bubble they cannot confidently confirm, which is why old multipathing nearly ensured their safety radius dropped from 20+km to about 3km. It used to be much easier to stay safe, now it is almost completely gone.
This is to say I do not think the current multipathing changes were the wrong choice, I think it is the correct way to go. It should go lower, but this is a good compromise for now.
6 Likes
Not with how terrain is handelt. if you keep in mind that threes range from 40 to 60 meters you dont have a safty zone at all. Old muti path was 100 meters minus the 60 meters of three hight so you had 40 meters at best space. Minus the terrain diping and riasing. Now its zero. It was removed in total. I mean realy the threes are giant in size. redwoods evreywhere.
How about we start we true to life terrain and true to life radars and misiels radars?!
Abstractions are needed.
It was overdone.
You’ve completely missed the point of what you’re quoting, sadly.
I was not referring to literal definitions of prop vs jet gameplay - nor would they matter because obviously… If you’ve played the game up to high rank jets, you, and I, and anyone else, already know how they’re played.
I understood what I was quoting you from. You were directing this at an individual with a low K/D in all types of Air gameplay after their statements of “actual knowledge” being required. However, I was focusing strictly on the statement.
My response isn’t strictly directed at you. It was meant to address the “skill” portion of your statement as many have different definitions of what it means and I provided a reason for that discrepancy.
If you want me to respond particularly to what you were talking about, maybe the guy finds using guns harder than using missiles or they just prefer how missile combat is. You did highlight he was noticeably better in that regard, even if the K/D was still negative. There is a lot of nuance when looking at K/D, but I would assume in his case he doesn’t completely know what he’s doing in air battles or just doesn’t care as much. At the very least, I can tell that he didn’t like how old multipathing encouraged the old meta of going low, a sentiment shared by nearly all who wanted multipath changes.
You seem to think multipathing height would be higher with more true to life systems, but you would be wrong. IIRC the multipathing height of all but the earliest radar guided missiles would be lower than the 60m they have it set at now. Things would be even harder to avoid by flyong low then they are now.
1 Like
Return 100m of multipath height!!! Wtf? 
I think it’s been stated that the “60 M” height is MSL not AGL
That looks like a RB game…
What does it change when the trees are taller than the multipath height.
Theres a difference between stalking and looking at your public player profile. We are allowed to look at your public profile, its not your home.
He is correct that your opinion isn’t backed by any experience.
The trees are getting fixed.
And it matters because it is the simnsubsection. Since you don’t play sim and obviously have an agenda. You are influencing how the issue in SB is perceived with your RB agenda.
If you want changes in RB. Post in RB. Simple as that.
Otherwise the devs get the impression that this is a SB problem and only fix it in SB. Which helps neither the SB Community nor you.
It still is not enough, people still evade missiles by only flying low. This is causing this crap gameplay where everybody is just flying low, hugging trees only to avoid head on missiles.
I want the interceptors to have a purpose and fly high, utilize the superior range of missiles fired from high alt high speed and kill those who are lower and are still insisting to fly head on without any brain.
1 Like
Multipath does not need to be nerfed any further.
1 Like
it can be whatever in RB. This is still the sim section, so why do you care how multipath works in SB?
i find it weird that multipathing is a simple meters above sea level thing. it should depend on far away you are from the ground and the shape of the ground. because it should be caused by a radar reflection from the ground. Current multipath is definately wrong.
I never mentioned a gamemode?