size and speed matters cruise missiles are large and slow moving so irl arh AA missiles can be used to intercept. But for fast moving ballistic missiles you have to contend with very high speeds to intercept, AAA batteries are tuned for that but AA radars would probably filter these with software. AA missiles are very small and usually looked at head on giving them a tiny RCS, like .01-.001m^2 tiny and they accelerate and move fast. On top of all this AA radars are not tuned and configured to detect targets with this profile and event if detected, software on the ARH missile and the aircraft would probably filter the radar return.
Still a game, not a simulator
It’s a game, it needs to be fun for everyone, allowing people to win engagements simply because they can afford to shoot down whatever you shoot at them is objectively bad for gameplay.
There’s 0 fun nor skill in shooting down missiles because you’re too dumb/lazy to notch/flare
5 Likes
I love this new meta.
I mean so like… saying its innacurate compared to DCS is just wrong. DCS has fairly poorly modeled missiles, and warthunder’s are quite frankly exceptional already. Im not aware of any other milsim that even comes close in that regard, but anyways.
Now, I do admit being able to intercept missiles as universally as is done in game is, somewhat unrealistic. But not as much as you’d think, several missiles like the MICA or AAM-4 can actually intercept missiles irl. And missiles do have suprisingly large RCSs for their size.
Decreasing missile’s RCS in game would help with this, and so would some changes to fusing mechanics, as depending on the type of the proximity fuse the reliability of such tactics would vary a good bit. But IMO it wouldnt reduce its effectiveness that much.
If you wanted it to be as “unreliable” as it is irl, it would really only be possible by changes to detection CEP. Warthunder’s implementation of target accuracy is good on paper, but its not perfect. As far as i can tell it is slightly too reliable in situations where the detection rate would be low, such as with detection of small, fast objects, such as missiles.
4 Likes
Speaking on modelling… I find that Gaijin does it better than Eagle Dynamics does, I’m sorry. They’re obviously “up there” in terms of things like visuals (cockpits, mostly; but that’s only because Gaijin has no need to model every little thing in every single cockpit in the game, which would take ages), but other than that, it’s… a coin toss, literally. Anyways, that’s not why I’m writing this.
I think the general sentiment isn’t that it (missile interceptions) shouldn’t be impossible, but that its current implementation of guaranteeing basically a 100% kill rate (assuming your radar spots them in time and/or your missile is fast enough to accelerate to intercept) is what is “wrong”.
As it currently stands, a sizeable portion (I would say everyone, but that’s a bit too generalist of me) of the Sim community absolutely despises this tactic being now widely adopted by many players. It’s unfair that as someone (for example) with <12 missiles that defends the traditional way, gets an actual high pK launch off just for it to be rendered useless at the last moment. When it happens once or twice, fine. But every single engagement is where the people start to get a little (and rightfully so) upset.
4 Likes
In the su30sm+ its good but it sucks in non ESA planes in particular if you are stuck with aim120b/c
As far as I know, trying to shoot down missiles with your own missiles should be very difficult to accomplish.
It’s hard to detect AA missiles even with advanced radar systems. It is also hard to hit a fast moving target with a low RCS. Maybe this is possible irl as a last resort (everything else failed so let’s try to intercept the missile), but I am sure it’s extremely difficult to do this because we don’t see this tactic as a standard in modern doctrine.
Notching, chaffing and electronic countermeasures (when they are added to WT) seem to be the way to go irl (much more reliable) and it should be the same in Simulator Battles.
I hope Gaijin removes or reworks this mechanic. I don’t blame the players because it’s a very strong and valid tactic to abuse your missile advantage (example: SU-30SM2 can always stay on the offensive against the F16-C because all incoming missiles can be shot down easily and it carries more than double the armament of its opponent).
3 Likes
9 Likes
4 Likes
Numbers on wiki are often too generous to be taken seriously
I ground for the Golden Eagle busted hump gettin it lvled up only to constantly get dipped by SU-30, Rafale, EF. I have gotten more kills in my F-16C Block 50 than any other plane including top tier Su30’s EF and Rafales so wtfudge bruv?
Feel free to find better sources those i did find did pretty much confirm that picture
Or at the very least the general angle
I also didnt find a single source suggesting a 0.0001 radar source is to small to be picked up
Just the range it will be picked up from is less
So even the su27 radar should be able to track air to air missiles. just the range it does it from will be pretty much useless in a headon
Not only the seeker needs to track correctly, whether the proxy fuse will work under such high closure is still debatable, but apparently war thunder doesn’t properly modelled how proxy work I guess
The detection range difference for this chart based on RCSs are correct, but the assumed sizes are, generous.
Cruise missiles are often 2-5x the listed rcs here. And AA missiles are, from what i’ve read, generally closer to 0.001m rcs than 0.0001m.
So that strengthens my thesis
At least regarding the tracking and finding part
My problem is exactly that. Shitty aim-120’s can shoot down a tiny missile but can’t hit a damn plane 30x the size of the missile. Typical war thunder bullshit that needs to be fixed but won’t. Everyone is excited for the aim-120D. I’m waiting for the absolute utter disappointment. That is how gaijin has trained me to be.
They aren’t
2 Likes
Aged like milk within 10 days 💔🥀
2 Likes
What are you even talking about? If anything, it’s the other way around. DCS is way more realistic compared to War Thunder, which is basically fantasy land.