An wrong blanket statement. Which is altogether meaningless. You could have just said “nuh uh”.
Part of the reason why multipathing would feel useless/so much lower is due to tree height. Trees in WT are unrealistically tall, which makes using multipathing much less reliable. I have also seen that some missiles can damage a plane when they impact the ground.
No need to insult people.
An obvious misrepresentation of my points. AIM-54 is unbalanced against most planes in a downtier, not only base bombers. Also, you for some reason feel the need to use personal attacks in portraying me as overly emotional. Is that because of your lack of legitimate points?
2 Likes
17Gs… You know what is considered to be an effective missile? 3 times the G pull of maneuvering targets. Everything in range of the Phoenix can easily exceed 6Gs. Skill issue
2 Likes
What an arbitrary and useless standard. Try to pull 10 Gs and dodge an AIM-9L launched at you from 3km.
3 Likes
Exceed very few aircraft can exceed 10Gs for the necessary time to do this, but it’s still very easy in a head on engagement, as is easily evidenced by how easy it is to do with AIM-7F/Ms and they are only slightly less at 25g.
It’s not arbitrary or useless at all, but I can see why someone that can’t even dodge AIM-54s would think that…
2 Likes
Because Aim7Fs/Ms have great range, better g pull, and also benefit from the multipathing change. They have better potential for successful kills than lobbing 18g energyless missiles from accross the battlespace. They pair extremely well with the F-14s speed and radar modes. They are just superior all around missiles and will net more kills than lobbing braindead ARHs at people.
3 Likes
Another personal attack. My argument is that it is overly hard to dodge AIM-54, not that it is impossible.
Not withstanding the other parts of the problem I mentioned, including missing usable RWR, assume a plane has decent maneuverability and OK RWR for the following:
The AIM-54 has maximum 16 km lock range. To be able to dodge it it any aircraft, the manueuver has to be timed at the precise range of ranges. This is already challenging, given the lock range can vary wildly. But the energy/positional loss required to dodge AIM-54 is high. As many planes facing F-14 in an uptier can’t identify the source of radar lock, it becomes a guessing game as to whether it is an ARH missile coming at you, ARH missile coming at close teammates, or just a random enemy locking at range. To try to dodge kinematically is to lose energy and render yourself vulnerable to further missiles or approaching enemies. To notch causes a large positional disadvantage; you are flying parallel to where you want to go, you can’t counterattack, and it makes it easier for enemies to get behind you.
This is the main reason for massive energy loss, positional disadvantage, and/or deaths to AIM-54, corresponding to over-caution or risk-taking respectively. The player launching it may be dumb, but the effect it has is far from it.
5 Likes
Better range? Are you a fkn idiot? The Phoenix has the most range ingame for a missile (R-27ER doesn’t count with its fake drag stats). Use altitude and lob phoenixes. They benefited more from the multipathing change than any sparrow did. Energyless missile is the exact opposite of what this missile is made for and is supposed to do. What are you doing, using them at close range?
There is something wrong with how the game calculates how low you are on certain maps. I just got hit right in the cockpit by a 530F when i was below the trees on golan. Thats well below 60 meters
No, but you should reread what I said.
I didn’t say they had better range, I said great range. Please make sure you read what others write.
I didn’t say they didn’t, I said SARH also benefited from the multipathing change.
No, I have usually used them at range where they tend to only kill braindead people.
Currently, as it stands, phoenixes are getting plenty of kills after the update, and yes sparrows are as well. Phoenixes have a massive area amid damage given their massive warhead, allowing them to deal massive amounts of splash damage to enemies who think they are low enough, but aren’t.
While yes, it might be ideal to take 2 sparrows with you for close range combat, the Phoenix beats the sparrow in the range department on a monumental scale for BVR and long range combat.
SARH didn’t benefit as much has ARH, I just want to emphasize that, that’s all.
It’s not exactly as simple to avoid them as it once was. Phoenixes have a large area of damage (yes ik ik, I’ve said it many times now, but honestly not enough). You can be as low as you think you need to be, and that’s not enough. You could be kissing the ground, and it wouldn’t be enough.
The missile no longer just kills little Timmy in his F-4S who is bombing, but now can kill the most skilled of players that are flying as low as possible. It nets multiple kills easily per match, much more than the sparrows can given how fast you can sling of the Aim-54s in a match.
Not to mention the good ol sparrow role making them useless anyway
1 Like
Dawg over 70% of the Phoenixes I fire are dodged or fooled by notch/chaff, even by players who are pre-occupied dodging missiles from much closer players. They are by no means free kills every match.
1 Like
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)