Multipathing in the Context of Impending Next-Generation IR Missiles

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
1

As many of you may already know, and developers are aware too: the multipathing mechanic that currently exists in War Thunder is a fictious representation of the real-life multipathing phenomenon that has largely become a non-issue since the advent of the monopulse and especially the inverse-monopulse seeker in the 70s. Some of the earlier implementation of this technology includes the Skyflash and AIM-7M.

It’s also interesting to note that in real life, the lower you are to the ground, the closer the reflected signal is to the true return signal, whereas in War Thunder it’s the opposite.

For those interested, here’s a more technical description of multipathing from Matlab: https://www.mathworks.com/help/radar/ug/simulate-radar-ghosts-due-to-multipath-return.html

Despite acknowledging this, developers have previously made it clear that there are no plans to make any changes to the multipathing effect.
But recent events made me wonder if there have been any changes to the developers’ position.

Impending Advanced IR Missiles
Recently, with the addition of the PL-8B missile, there was a bug report made (and acknowledged) suggesting that the PL-8B’s countermeasure rejection is much more advanced than represented in game.

Brief Summary of Pl-8B IRCCM:
The digital multi-element seeker not only has reduced FOV during tracking, but is also able to detect waveform amplitude spikes, and continue guidance based on memory of the pre-spike waveform. Its implementation in game would be “gate-width” and “tracking-suspension” IRCCM combined. In real life, the PL-8B also has considerable pre-flaring resistance due to FOV reduction prior to launch.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Vm2IhvAqFgYY

If implemented realistically, this will make the PL-8B the most advanced air-to-air missile carried on fixed-wing aircraft within the game in terms of IRCCM. This opens the doors for the addition of increasingly advanced IR missiles, such as the Python 4, IRIS-T, MICA-IR, and AIM-9X Block I.

How Multipathing Ties into This:
In the game’s currently state, ARH missiles continue to be the premier air-to-air weapon in top tier air battles. Use cases for IR missiles are rare, the separation between opposing aircraft is often too large for IRCCM—or even the missile kinematic performance—to be effective.

Even so, it is still possible and not uncommon to see players skimming the ground and essentially obtain immunity to virtually all incoming missiles, especially at a shallower angle.
In a typical head-on scenario, opposing aircraft must defend enemy missiles using evasive maneuvers (F-pole, notching, cranking) to avoid mutual destruction, meaning there is considerable downtime in between launch opportunities.
However, a player who is using the multipathing mechanic is exempt from this. They are able to easily push for the merge without notching, with minimal cranking, nose-hot in the entire duration, and still being able to counter-launch at opponents. It is simultaneously defense and offense, and allows the player to gain a favorable position at the merge with much less effort than the player at higher altitude who is constantly cranking and notching. Not only is this unrealistic, it is very frustrating to play against.

Concern:
Even in the current state of the game, with the position advantage that a player obtains using multipathing, a Fox-2 launch can be highly lethal. The hypothetical addition of more advanced IR missiles is likely to further promote this style of gameplay, and I suspect that the average air-RB match may regress into something more similar to the IRCCM furball meta that followed the release of the F-16C and MiG-29SMT. No doubt ARH missiles will still remain dominant, but this style of gameplay only exacerbates the issues we already face in the 16v16 chaos.

Solution
Reduce multipathing, preferably on a per-missile and per-radar basis, especially on more modern radar transceivers.

Foreseeable Consequences
It is not only a method of balancing more powerful IR missiles in the future. Disincentivizing the option for multipathing doesn’t substantially make ARH missiles any more lethal than they already are. Instead, it forces opposing aircraft to maintain larger separation from each other, and players must think more carefully about their positioning. There will be less chaotic furballs and potentially more isolated fights as players are more distributed across the map, partially mitigating the issue of high player-density in 16v16 environments.
However, it does significantly raises the skill floor in top tier, which I can see the average player struggling with. But aside from that I genuinely do not see many downsides.
I would like to hear your opinions.

4 Likes
2

Balancing Gen 5 IRs is certainly going to be hard, and if ARH continues to be so heavily mitigated, it will certainly force some extremely one-side fights. In essence, ASRAAM slinging Typhoons and MICA IR slinging Rafales will become the meta if other nations cannot use ARH missile to counter them due to their sheer range.

The game would almost certainly return to a lawn-mowering IR meta once again I reckon.

5 Likes
4

You are giving the average player to much credit. They don’t want to use those tactics. They just want to skim the ground. War Thunder players don’t want to learn. It’s insane. Out of all the games that have gameplay related changes ever so often War Thunder players adapt the worst. Phoenixes were added almost 3 years ago and you still have a lot of people complaining that they are OP. AIM-9Ms (and other seeker shutoff missiles) were added to planes a year and a half ago and people still think they are unflarable. I know people that have played the game since beta and I hear them complain that their RWR hasn’t warned them when they die to a IR missile.

Most players simply don’t want to adjust. They refuse to learn. It’s going to be impossible to explain to them that IIR missiles can’t really be flared.

Nothing will change until players start learning how to play the game.

3 Likes
5

I’m legitimately not sure if removing multipath is a good idea or not. Dcs multipath is near 0, and it forces slower paces bvr metas and using terrain Masking to close in for dogfight. This is much more fun imo. However not all maps in war thunder would allow this. Denmark is remarkably flat. You can detect the enemies a few seconds after takeoff. Without multipath, there’s little to no opportunity to get close to an enemy. This would severely lessen the effectiveness of short range ARH missile carriers. And would make things like eft and f15e far stronger. The pl8b does no good if the enemies are 10+ miles away and effortlessly slinging missiles that are faster and higher than yours. With little to no ability to defend them. That leaves notching or kinematic defeat as the only defensive options. Kinematic defeat of a high and fast missile is not easy, nor practical. And notching is difficult to maintain as modern radars and missile have a very narrow notch gate.

I think they could add it as a test scenario in a dev server. Maybe it leads to more tactical slow laced gameplay. That would be good. Or maybe it makes some planes way better, some way worse, and makes the overall experience worse. Idk

6

So basically nothing changes?

7

Said missiles have considerably less effective range due to the nature of IR seekers, and the subsequent design. The method of evading these missiles is also considerably different from evading radar missiles.

The issue is that multipathing artificially nerfs the effectiveness of longer range engagements. This alone isn’t terrible for gameplay, but the dynamic between short range (guns and IR missiles) and long range (ARH and SARH) weapons is drastically different for aircraft at sea level from aircraft at any other altitude.

For most situations, SARH and ARH missiles are very deadly, but the moment the enemy hits the deck, this weapon is suddenly no longer an option. This discrepancy is jarring, and also incredibly unrealistic.

8

Get rid of MP and 300kph notch gate and therefore No One’s Good Except AMRAAAAAAAM =D

2 Likes
9

Considering MICA IR’s (it can be used for BVR as well) effective range is the same as the current MICA EM; note MICA EM are underperforming in range right now, these could indeed become an issue.

IMO, current multipathing is still unrealisticly high and ground hugging still too rewarding / common.

3 Likes
10

Will a suggestion master be able to change it?

11

Unfortunately no.

12

Yup, watch how quickly people beg for MP to be removed when they fire an AMRAAM and it slams into the ground whilst they get hit and killed by a MICA IR or ASRAAM :D

1 Like
13

Completely agreed on the point. Multipathing should be reduced / or even removed completely on per-missile / per-radar basis. And the main goal which be achieved by this is that there will be no way to dodge this deadly missiles just by flying low. You’ll have to bleed enery or hide from radar waves using terrain. This will increase the length of the match and will oblige players to learn “how to top-tier”.

As the other guy mention that in general WT players are lazy to learn and struggle with each change - as I can see is not always the truth. I remember how people were dying to ARH missiles when they were initially introduced to all nations (last summer iirc). And what is now? It’s much harder to get a kill in BVR because now everyone knows how to notch, how to bleed missiles energy and etc. And from that time missiles have only became stronger as many late 4 gens with very high acceleration arrived in our game.

Going back to removing multipathing completely, with this inroduction almost every ARB map should be redesigned to implement much more natural covers like mountains and hills which will allow players to still counter launches from below or at equal height. It highly likely won’t save you from high altitude launches as the missile will just be pointing downwards. And by implementing this we’ll achieve that flying low is now a disadvantage rather than the “immunity to S/ARH” as it is right now.

You can still trick the missile by descending quickly so that the intercept point is below ground level, and the missile will simply slam into the ground trying to get to where it needs to be to successfully intercept your aircraft.

And also I honetsly don’t know what to do with the jets which are really good in terms of flight performance (like early F-16s) but lacks S/ARH capabilities. There’s no reason for them to climb so they’re gonna struggle.

As I can imagine the devs are aware of the current ARB issues and gonna definately cook something in terms of defensive capabilities of modern aircrafts. I guess will soon gonna see the implementation of ECMs / decoys which should reduce TWS-lock ranges. This will however again lead to the reductions of as known “no-escape-zones” so players will still have to get closer to enemies to achieve kills. And now having multipath disabled should make people think twice how they’re gonna evade the counter-launch before going offensive. This will generally increase the playerbase skill level.

WT players are gonna adapt, we always do. That’s the idea.

3 Likes
14

Yes please.

15

Maybe I’m ignorant or misunderstanding that mechanic/aspect, but what does multipathing have to do with IR AAM’s?

If I understand correctly, multipathing is the effect where returning radar signals are also reflected of the surface of the earth, and thus may confuse the receiver. But that’s not the case for IR radiation where the reflection off the earth surface probably is negligible, no?

16

The best way to counter Gen 5 IRs will be through the use of ARH wepaons and staying out of their range. if ARH can be mitigated through ground hugging then they will be easily defeated still. Assuming Gen 5s have some form of front aspect flare resistance, then aircraft like the Typhoon with ASRAAM and Rafale with MICA IR will just win every fight because they can hug the deck being immune to ARH missiles and out range everyone elses IR missiles by quite a margin.

2 Likes
17

Basically the next generation IR missiles will be undodgeable. You’ll not be able to dodge them by flaring. The only way will be energy evasion or natural obstacles between the seeker and your signature. This leads us to the situation “who shoots first always wins”. That’s why you should always maintain distance. And you can’t maintain distance because BVR (ARH) missiles can’t hit if the target is just staying low all the time. So this is almost mandatory to engage in CQC engagements, use IR missiles and this is ridiculous for 4+ gen fighterjets - unrealistic, boring, stupid and etc.

4 Likes
18

Well… Some CMs work against them like BOL. but you will still need to defend heavily against them

19

Before all this talk about removing multipath and next-gen IR seekers or fox-3s, we need a major rework of Air RB.
The current matches of 16 v 16 without multipath and even more advanced missiles is just going to make the matches last even shorter and hectic.
Not to mention we still don’t have stock chaff.

20

Of course, but chicken or the egg.

Without removal of Multipathing then there might not be a reason for Gaijin to give chaff stock or further reduce match making sizes.

Kinda need all at the same time

1 Like
21

Would like to see a rework for Air RB first, especially for higher tiers, because I don’t enjoy the 16 v 16 gameplay one bit, regardless of multipath issues. I personally never really had an issue with multipath. In the current matchmaker, it’s needed imo.

Also, for non-fox-3 planes fighting against fox-3 planes, multipath can mitigate the disadvantage. Non-fox-3s shouldn’t be fighting planes with 8+ fox-3s, but compression is an issue that never seems to be addressed properly.

There are a lot of things that need to be implemented to air RB, such as rework and decompression, which I would like to see done first before other suggestions get implemented.

I personally don’t think we can get everything added at the same time.

1 Like