They can go hand in hand. It can be both emotional and factual. There isn’t alot of documentation for any of this for the systems we have in game, and the majority of people here dislike it because they don’t find it fun. Both are valid and come to the same conclusion.
Discuss the possibility of change.
You dislike the meta, what would you suggest as a way for developers to mitigate, nerf, or remove it?
I mean, this is literally a game
The game being enjoyable should be more important than “realism” for most cases
It should be nerfed for sure. According to what I’ve been told in theory it is possible, but not as it is in game.
For those ones talking about “realism” chances to hit a fox-3 with another fox-3 are way below 50% (at least), due to low rcs and missile speed. Whilst it’s possible for a modern radar to both detect and track a missile chances of a positive impact are too low.
Is there documentation to back this up?
Unfortunately no. I talked with this guy, explained the situation and linked your youtube video to let him understand clearly what is about. Because of what happened on the forum it’s strictly forbidden to share any kind of data about vehicles, their performance equipment and weapons. This is the best I could get from him
I’m going to be purposefully generic since this is a broad suggestion intended for later in-depth data gathering and analysis.
The issue can be broken down into several parts:.
A good starting point would be a full review of munitions RCS as a whole, not just missiles. Missile and other munition radar signatures should be checked for accuracy, along with how those targets are handled once detected.
Radar resolution and target merging/de-merging should also be modeled more realistically. Closely spaced targets should not separate into clean individual contacts as easily as they currently do, especially when a missile has just left the rail and is still in close proximity to the launching aircraft. Missile detection and tracking should take radar resolution cells into account so that clean separate tracks are not generated immediately off the rail.
Airborne radar detection and tracking of missile-sized targets should then be adjusted so performance better matches plausible real-world limits for each radar and target class. This should include not just raw detection range, but also track initiation, track maintenance, and targetable track generation.
Radar filters, track filters, and track initiation logic should also be reviewed so that highly ambiguous or low-confidence small-target returns are not promoted into stable targetable tracks too easily. A track-confidence gate would help here, instead of immediately presenting everything after a single scan cycle.
Proximity fuze behavior should also be reviewed. This includes fuze delay, fuze logic, whether the fuze is radio- or laser-based where relevant, and how fuze sensitivity or trigger conditions are set or adjusted against very small, high-speed targets.
Finally, ARH seeker radar logic should follow the same general rules as airborne radars where applicable, including the same kinds of limitations in detection, discrimination, and track reliability. Seeker behavior should also be differentiated by radar type rather than flattening all ARH seekers into similar small-target performance.
Don’t mind this Lance guy, he likes baiting just to get attention around here and that’s well known.
If you are suspecting of cheating, you can always check the replay and ask around if the behaviour seems like cheating and of course, if so, you can report them. It would be much appreciated by the player base to flag people with that behaviour.
I like these a lot. I think one of my biggest hopiums is if and when they give a stealth a proper attempt, missile RCS will get lumped in.
missile required to stop interception
What does this have to do with the topic of the iron dome meta?
Nothing.
But it also does not harm anyone to have a little bit of off-topic conversation as long as the topic at hand is not flooded with them. This was only one message and you could have ignored it. Instead, you choose to point out someone’s fault in public. This might seem OK to many people but this game’s playerbase is full of young people, perhaps building up self-esteem.
IF one of your real life goals is to become a good person one day, next time if you see someone’s unintentional mistake, choose to ignore it or at least be polite enough to send them a private message.
And a little reminder that it actually does not cost anything to be a kind and a genuine person.
I think we have basically already reached this point. Typically my air sim games at top tier last about 1-2 sorties before most people have quit the game; one team builds an advantage and the others leave for a better maps like Denmark.
This is probably going to get worse after the event is over and will not improve until next gimmick is added to the game.
Until then sim top tier is basically a dead game mode for anyone with more than 2 brain cells. You could replace it with a single player game mode with named bots and have effectively the same experience.
Then post it elsewhere, or private message. Off-topic discussion decreases signal-to-noise ratio and devalues the thread usefulness. Keep discussions on topic.
The topic has been flooded with them, including by you.
And he could have not posted it. Repeated off-topic posts have consistently derailed the conversation. It is the responsibility of everyone to curtail behavior that does not contribute to a productive discussion environment.
This is the public internet, not kindergarten. The rules and terms of use are readily outlined during account creation. It is not another user’s job to handhold people as if they are toddlers and don’t know any better. This is exactly what causes Eternal September
If the mistake is not pointed out, the mistake will not be rectified and will continue to occur.
The learning process includes acknowledging mistakes.
Your virtue signaling is superb. If only you followed your own advice, you wouldn’t have had several replies marked hidden and being directly told to shut up by other users for off-topic flaming.
The irony is palpable.
To be fair, that could also be because it’s not very worthwhile to keep playing air sim battles once the SL and RP boosters run out (usually 30 minutes), unless you regularly manage to get points every 15 minutes without being shot down. So i imagine many players would rather leave the lobby, activate a new set of boosters and join a different lobby.
The economy has been the same for over 3 years since I started playing and I have pretty regularly played top tier through multiple updates. Normally population picks up on weekends and during events; both of those factors apply when I took these screenshots.
I think when I counted the total number of players in games at top tier on a Friday evening it was around 30 total players.
Anecdotally I am sure that @TFS_64Mustang can also attest that his selection of top tier matches is the worst that it has ever been.
I can tell the situation became worst patch after patch. I was able to complete the grind of Us tree at the lower br where often there’s a mixed nations match on smaller maps. Pretty bad experience tbf, but that was the only way to play on the blue side.
Now as a general rule I don’t go above 13.3 and even there lobbies are a sort of wasteland. It’s not only the meta, the economy system too is killing sim. Useful action system is unbearable and totally inadeguated, plus having to pay the whole repair cost before spawning doesn’t help at all.
As an ocasional player of sim just to grind event with less effort i dont undestand the comlain about this meccanic i mean just fly at 30 to 50m and wobble up and down an all 12 missle salvo is going to miss
You could do the same thing. Your “warnings” are also off-topic. If you don’t want the topic to be flooded by off-topic messages, send them a private message. Was this too hard to think? Perhaps for some.
You are not an exception to the very thing you object to.
And you are still carrying on off-topic conversation right here right now. At least, I believe it is ok to have an off-topic discussion. You object to it and yet keep doing it. :)
Nobody said don’t point out. Read again my whole message if you have problems understanding it the first time. You could have sent a private message, right? Well, actually no, you like doing this and that was my original message describing you.
If only some people could have had the capacity to understand it though.
Have you just learned this quote recently? You keep repeating it like a 5yo learned a new word and keep repeating it at the family dinner table :)
ofc, it was a generalised statement - the detectability of them im sure should be much closer for solid solutions with aircraft in game and especially fox3 seekers, i actually nearly wrote that in my comment but didnt mention it cause it was already talked about a few times earlier in the thread.
honeslty, I like to play JAS-39C and send 18 GBU-39 on enemy anti-air, it kinda looks like a massive drone attack. And when he keeps shooting them down, at some points he’ll run out o missiles.
The way you carry 18 of them, light but precise, it really feels like the “economic” war run in contemporary wars, sending low cost attacks.
And the setup for such attacks is easy; get just under mach one 20km away, then send them around 1-2km of altitude, then get down and notch/multipath the incoming missiles.
Sadly, we can’t get the chaff/flare pods with the GBU-39. So sometimes I take one or two Fox-3 for a better air-to-air defense and more conter-measures, and you’ll get 8 GBU-39 but it is less effective.
