Multipathing and AIM-54s

Ive had multiple friends say they get about a 50% hit rate on a good launch. Sure it can be notched, but not everyone does that for a phoenix, especially when they think they’re low enough.

Yes, not everyone is a free kill, and you’re not always going to get one, but I’ve found bringing 4 Aim-54s to be extremely helpful and effective in netting kills, much more so than sparrows which require good launches, managing of the radar, and one kill at a time.

1 Like

The exact same thing could be said about the F-105D having to deal with All Aspect missiles (Its not like I’m asking for it to be lowered to 9.7~10.0 from 11.0) like the R-60M, R-73 and R-2xT (let alone the AIM-9L, -9P-4 & -9M), all without flares. It doesn’t out accelerate their carriers(especially if loaded down with ordnance), they are very common at your BR and you have little to no recourse even if you take a number of rockets to serve as ersatz countermeasures also causes issues due to the release limit being Mach 1.1.

Should everything equipt with the All Aspect missiles be sent to 12.7 so the F-105D can’t see them?
What about the F-111A;
That’s been made into a boat and is subpar in anything other than a straight line, has a bugged cannon piper, overly restrictive missile armament, is unbale to carry the optimal 4x M117 Slant loaded on the inner wing station’s MER to avoid limiting wings sweep (must take either MER w/ 6x or TER w/ 3x) and inability to internally carry the Cannon and a single missile that it should have.

That’s just something that will need to be accounted for once players grow into the meta, Its not as if the AIM-54 was otherwise adjusted in a unique manner respective to other missiles even though there are a number of outstanding reports about erroneous characteristics that could have been fixed like implementing bank to turn(17 > 25G overload limit), Smokeless motor, improved Seeker / clutter disambiguation, and more.

Honestly if it is such an issue I wouldn’t be surprised if DECM (Defensive Electronic Countermeasures), ECM pods, or Towed decoys are implemented in future; where applicable to reduce engagement ranges to those of burn though for suffering airframes. Alternately potentially the return or otherwise the implementation of a passive mission score accrual mechanic so you don’t get absolutely nothing for you time. though I do feel the largest contributor to these issues is the static Spawn and Objective locations making learning and predicting intercept routing and timing trivial.

Maybe when I get more experience shooting these things at people I’ll have a 50/50 success rate, but so far they seem very easy to fool for anyone who is actually maneuvering their plane.

Is this even possible now? The radar automatically manages track modes after launch and it seems to suck at it a lot more than I did when you could manually switch between PD and SRC after launch.

Don’t most ARH missiles (and some SARH missiles) have a home on jam feature that would make ECM less useful than most are anticipating?

Yes, but they aren’t effective against all types of jamming(since jamming can be pulsed, and tracking gates captured), and if modeled in depth (Like RWRs were, initial implementation probably wouldn’t go into extensive depth but be abstracted and simplified for game play purposes) it depends on the specific configuration of the systems on board the target and those of the Missile / Shooter.

a brief overview

It would mostly be to hard counter extreme range shots, and draw out engagements, by forcing the shooter to continue to support missiles in flight.


?? F-105D is 10.0 in ARB (10.7 in AAB). The only all-aspect missile carriers such as Su-25 and A-10 at its range are slow and have been moved up a BR step (in addition to much of the crowd near 9.0 being moved down before). F-111 is 10.3 in ARB.

What I am arguing is that given the recent nerf to multipathing mechanics from 100m to 60m, the F-14s are too powerful and have passed the threshold for the need for a BR raise. 6 AIM-54s are no laughing matter, especially now. And the F-14s’ kits are good and all-rounder enough to work well even with a BR raise to 12.0 and 12.3. Just look at the J-8F which went from 11.7 to 12.3 over 2 PL-12s and a flight model worse than that of the F-14s’.

1 Like

No stockholm syndrome here, its just that the only people defending the F-14 on 11.7 either never played any other nation in their entire life (literally), or just heavily neglect any of them for the favour of the US, doing so using the arguments “bro just fly low” or “just notch/chaff/go cold” without bothering themselves to read the thread/realise how different Aim-54s are right now in comparison with how they performed before the update

salty US main insulting people (he won’t be able to play WT if it wasn’t for laughably OP US planes)

You are reported, please stop lying/trolling in this forum, you bring nothing to the conversation, go back playing F5C/F4S

This is probably one of the best comments on the topic, but unfortunately they won’t listen because being a branded US main requires no skill/brain/critical thinking, only being extremely self centred and arrogant/ignorant.

So, no variants of the Su-17 / -22, MiG-23 / -27 have all aspect missiles and are slow, are you sure?

I would be concerned how the F-14A would do at 12.0 or above without access to All Aspect IR missiles, or a HMS (both of which are possible, with the VTAS III & AIM-95 / AIM-9L; see spoiler below) considering how hot the engines are and comparative lack of countermeasures vs the F-14B.

AIM-95 & HMS

F-14A & AIM-95



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX45ZC29WGY

The F-14B has its own issues with systems like the AN/AXX-1 TCS not being properly modeled and assorted issues with the AWG-9 and -54 interactions being odd, and a lack of HMS on top of seeing stiffer competitors at 13.0 since they are no longer limited to the 4 airframes in a full down tier per match limit and so efficacy would suffer due to seeing them more frequently which themselves have advantages over the F-14 airframe that can be used.

If you know / expect that they are coming and respect the threat they pose they are easy to deal with (especially if they are spammed at you), its only if you get ambushed and even then the AIM-7F is more of a threat at those distances since the AIM-54s take forever to get up to speed. Sure if played well they won’t be many options but its getting into the situation that the F-14 excels at dealing with and not knowing the issue, I personally don’t think that the F-111B, F-12A, F-102 / -106 or F-108, Su–11 / -15 MiG-25 or -31, etc. would be doing much worse, even they would be similar armed.

They don’t always get stuck with US pilots or teams so there is some explanation of the changes, also I don’t think fox 3s being able to see F-4Cs would be a good thing.

2 Likes

which variant of mig23 has all aspect missiles at 10.7 or lower? Lying much?

I would not be concerned about F-14 at all because it is a singular plane, even though it is from holy US TT, which makes people from every other nation suffer due to being unable to counter it in any meaningful way

you’ve been told multiple times already why exactly you won’t see it coming playing a non-us plane of this br, but you keep pushing this US main agenda nevertheless

So Fox-3 seeing F4, one of the most advanced planes of the BR is not okay, but Fox-3 seeing something like F-104/Mig-21 is totally fine?

Nvm, another 16-years old hardcore US main, you could say whatever you like




For a “US Main” i sure have a lot of games and vehicles that arent US

Cope

Edit: cope

1 Like

as mentioned, please go trolling/lying somewhere else

cherry picking modes where you have the least amount of matches played won’t help you with overall statistics bro

well, average US main just showed its true nature, nothing new

average Lawnmower showed their ability to do basic math, nothing new

Edit: lmao the butthurt is showing with flags

enjoy your 30 days of vacation

Since when were up tiers retired, no? at least try to not construct strawmen. the 10.7 /11.0 variants of the Su-17 / -22 do have the R-60M(K)

Try respecting your RWR, it might help to understand the capabilities of the system and where the limitations lie.

If you know your RWR can’t separate a Launch warning from the tracking signal. Please try to not assume they all must be tracking, play as if they are a Launch warning and proceed from there.

You know having pioneering systems makes things difficult to balance and if it got too hard to do so, Gaijin could always reimplement the Hard BR matchmaking wall that they had for a while which entirely prevented the F-104 from getting down tiers.

Well the fearless pioneers at Gaijin in their infinite wisdom had to start somewhere, and the fact that other Air Defense / Homeland Protection Airframes had been skipped over that would introduce these concepts earlier (AIM-4 equipt airframes; e.g. F-89, F-101B, F-102, F-106, etc.), and the fact that Multi-pathing was allowed to become a crutch that was left alone for long enough to develop a meta around abusing it doesn’t help, considering that it hard countered Radar missiles obviously devalued airframes based around their use, considering the changes is it any surprise that existing tactics failed after the changes.

Don’t forget that there is more than enough data to practically remove it as a factor from the game for relevant missiles entirely.

2 Likes

You know you are sorting by victories, not matches in;

right?

My AB stats are more complete, and much more current than my RB ones. Can you post those for me?

1 Like