This is why im really pushing the DL reworks. Both sides benefit, BVR reliability goes up, notching in theory remains the same in one direction, and planes at 13.7 that would benefit a little would be NATO and Chinese. Think its the best place to start, with the least learning curve and potential harm imo.
1 Like
J-15T and F-16AM players in shambles
well, it must have been a long time since you played the Tomcat to say such blasphemy.
The Phoenixes are the missiles that suffer THE MOST, currently, cos of the overtuned multipath effect (nowhere near real life) and the ultra easy notching of the current build of the game.
You need to fire around 10-12 perfectly launched AIM-54s to score a single kill in a SIM lobby with half competent adversaries.
1 Like
For me:
Reduce notching window angles, notching can be done and should be, but not in the current overeliable way, people need to actually try to match the 90 degree angle instead of just turning right or left like they do right now.
Maintain (or even increase) chaff capability.
Reduce multipath to a low, more realistic, ceiling. I would say 10m over ground, maybe 15m. Making it possible to, theoretically, multipath missiles above water (like all instances of it happening IRL, over a flat surface) but no over ground (rugged terrain).
And to all of you, remember that fox3/1 balance is not affecting ONLY top tier, which is the minority of the planes that carry FOX3s and 1s, but most planes from 9.7 onwards…
maybe, but for the changes to be realistic, and actually do something for balance, chaff bloom needs to be added. in real life, chaff isnt something that goes 1200 kmh to 0 the moment it leaves the dispenser. it takes half a second or two, which isn’t much, but it does confuse the seeker for a few moments. if you watched any dcs BVR or even close range videos, you can see people like growlingsidewinder spam chaff while diving and doing erratic manuevers.
what this adds is, realism, addresses the issue you talked about, (not entirely, changes still need to be made) and chances to defeat the seeker of radar missiles without having to go to always 90 degrees and spam the chaff button as hard as you can. but, its not as easy as notching. infact, its pretty difficult and not something to be relied on since its not consistent.
HOWEVER, you have to note that for this to happen, gaijin will have to give chaff speed, and tell it how much it needs to slow down based on altitude and other factors. now imagine 16v16 with everyone spamming chaff, this will cook the servers. which is why im not expecting it soon, but if somehow the server issue is resolved, this will be awesome.
3 Likes
speaking of phoenixes, did anyone notice that they go pitbull WAAY too late? i dont know if this is because they loft too much and get in to my rwr blindspot above me, but i remember phoenix/fakours going pitbull at like 8 kilometers at maximum. i didnt used to have time to get in to the notch in my su 30’s, i think i’ll try playing a plane with 360 rwr to see if this is the case or not
1 Like
Yes, this is also one of the things that makes the fakour so deadly against the average player.
It is giga fast AND warns you late.
Iirc it depends on your rwr sensitivity but I never fully tested how it affects when you get warned
1 Like
It wouldn’t cook the servers, it’s just math. Computers are good at math.
I honestly didn’t notice any change, what i’ve been experiencing is random losses of DL and completely unreliable Inertial Guidance. I believe the pitbull was suppose to happen at 20 km to target, iirc.
lets hope gaijin adds it then. because its highly needed.
not a change, i think they were always like this tbh. (im talking about this year, i wasnt that active before that or at a br where i saw f14’s)
i dont have the f14, so i dont know how its radar and datalink works with the phoenix. i just used to have this problem of them getting pitbull at extremely close range where i cant get into a horizontal or a vertical notch at all. it might be just me or my fault, i dunno.
1 Like
What did I say that was wrong?
I never said the playstyle was good, only that its the best thing the F-14 has. If you don’t carry and use the 6 phoenixes you are essentially just playing a 12.7 jet at 13.0 or a 12.3 jet at 12.7. A very mid one at that. These are all air RB BRs. This thread is also about air RB due to the nature of the conversation.
That’s an assumption of how the F-14 is played… The best feature of the AIM-54 is the ARH, not the range.
I use it as cloely to an AIM-120 as I can, since the chance of hitting a long-tange target is still extremely low
That is how the F-14 is played. The AIM-54 is not useful under 15km of range.
Good for you, but this means playing inefficiently and in contrast to the jet’s intended playstyle.
Worst chances up close where just rolling once can dodge an aim54…
The AIM-54 is not generally useful at most range, especially any ranges beyond 20km.
The AIM-54 was not even used for it’s intended purpose in real life, it’s not like I can spawn slow flying, non-manuvering, enemy bombers at will
That is your opinion
no, that’s the only range it actually is useful, because the only purpose it serves in this entire game is skill checking people to see if they are paying attention and know how to notch or turn around. Firing them up close just means they are effectively easier to avoid sparrows that guide themselves, what is the point? Play any other jet.
And all of this is yours, what is your point
To be able to do anything else without having to guide the missile, of course…
The point is to discredit your rhetoric by introducing other scenarios/logical perspectives with merit, instead of someone perhaps trusting your opinionated logic at face value.
You’re firing an ineffective, easily dodged missile at close range completely outside of its intended purpose and element, at an even lower % rate chance to hit than if you fired it in BVR
You’re doing an awful job at that. “Here’s my opinion, it counters yours, gg” isnt how anything actually works in the real world. Nor here.
A lot of that is still true even if you fire from long range, and like I said, the “intended purposed” is barely relevant to what the real gameplay calls for
Do you have objective proof of this?
I didn’t say it counters yours, and having multiple logical perspectives to see things is usually better than one persons opinion
Yes, except you are fully safe from return fire and you have a higher percent chance to kill doing this than firing up close…
I am talking about the VIDEO GAME. Do you see me referring to IRL ever? No?
No I don’t carry around my 6000 page book of evidence
You did in no uncertain words. You’re in fact even trying to silence me by talking over me and pretending like I’m saying something crazy when I’m just speaking objectively.
You won’t get another reply. Learn how to have your own opinion without trying to force others out the way.