It’s quite simple, in order to progress and modernize the game, multipathing needs to be removed and reduced to realistic levels in air RB. However, Gaijin needs to change a few key things in order to do so.
-
All rank 8 aircraft should have stock chaff, as well as having all A2A weaponry unlocked. rank 8 MBTs recently got stock APFSDS, so gaijin should do something similar to aircraft.
-
Less player density. This can be achieved be reducing playercounts to 12v12 for 10.0+. and 10.0 or 8v8 for 13.0+. We also need maps with more spread out objectives, and multiple airfield spawnpoints.
-
BR decompression. This is the hardest one to do, but also the most beneficial. To put it simply, planes without ARH missiles shouldn’t be facing anything better than 13.3 aircraft, and current 12.0 planes shouldn’t be facing the 13.0 ARH slingers.
-
A marker rework. I propose that all planes within 2-4 km with a direct line of sight to be spotted for you at all times, but any markers spotted by shared spotting have a hard limit of 10km. The rest of the system will work as it normally does. This would lead to less players all ganging up on 1 plane, while also increasing the use of other tactics. This is probably the most controversial opinion, but I stand by it.
With all of those, Gaijin would be able to comfortably remove multipathing, because it’s unacceptable that you can fly low and be immune to most missiles.
16 Likes
Stock chaff is a nice idea and is certainly needed in the game.
For the other part, I doubt this is going to happen as I bet they get some income from people GE’ing weapons they need for easier gameplay.
Tanks have stock darts but those aren’t the best, while planes already have their missiles but in lower quantities.
3 Likes
Why 12v12 isnt the standard with 16v16 as the option is beyond me, and that could be expanded to include an 8v8 option.
BR decompression… there is a limit to what can be done I think. some 13.7s and the 14.0s could move up a little, but probably shouldnt move up too signficantly to the point where they are essentially in a BR to themselves.
A marker rework… Id be interested in a live server test event where you had ARB with no enemy markers at all. Much like you have in GRB.
6 Likes
The realistic situation of multipathing is removed for the unrealistic game mode known as arcade battles.
Go play that if you don’t want realism.
The minimum altitude for a missile like Skyflash was determined not by Multipathing but by the prox fuse triggering on the ground. (33m iirc)
60m is, without a doubt, far far higher than it should be for missiles developed in the 1970s.
Modern missiles like AMRAAM? Would have to assume they can at least match the performance, if not maybe better it.
Perhaps not outright removal, but certainly continued and significant reduction in MP height would be 100% realistic and MP height should be set on a missile by missile basis. Some would be more affected than others, but it would further mitigate the ability to use it as a primary form of defence
Because this… is just stupid
1 Like
60 meters is realistic so long as trees are taller than they should be and JF-17 is larger than it should be.
JF-17’s model needs to be fixed as well as tree height.
Either way 60 meters is more realistic than not.
2 Likes
Except. 60m is unrealsitic.
Arcade should keep 60m and Realistic and Sim should get much lower MP heights.
5 Likes
Arcade should have it removed entirely.
So you want the unrealistic gamemode to be realistic and the realistic gamemodes to be unrealistic?
6 Likes
Yes, but at same time as more comprehensive countermeasures for aircraft
Multipath is a real situation.
Also before missile unique properties we need ECM and better chaff simulation.
4 Likes
It could probably be reduced to 40 or even removed entirely in sim at the moment.
It’s so dumb that you can be immune by flying low, and removing it will promote actual skill.
1 Like
Multipathing is a realistic feature, but it varies missile to missile. I doubt that an Aim-120 would have the same MP level as an Aim-7D, or even an R-24R.
3 Likes
I think the ultimate implementation would be a per missile basis. Some it would basically be nothing, others it would actually have a meaningful impact. Might cause a few balancing issues, but for the most part, shouldnt as the missiles most affected by MP would also have radars likely without PD and so just as affected by ground clutter.
I don’t think you know how much skill is required to fly low…
Also AIM-120 has a 40 meter limit until C-6 or C-7.
They should model all types of countermeasures with more detail at the same time as this
I can quite happily cruise along at 50ft / 15m all day long in SB and never had an issue with hugging the deck. 60m is stupidly easy.
Source? a YF-12 firing an AIM-47 at mach 3.2 hit a flying target only 152m over ground in 1960’s, but you don’t think AIM-120C-5 from 2000’s can do below 40m, with all the advancement since 1960’s, especially in electronics?
1 Like
Not very much considering most maps have large and flat areas. It’s only “difficult” on Spain, Golan Heights, and Vietnam, and 2 of those maps are part ocean, while the last is still flat enough. Even the mountainous maps we have still have huge areas that are completely flat.
I agree.
