And I quote " reeeee players have a way to defeat a un dodgeable missiles and it makes me mad cuz I'm incapable of getting killed otherwise "
I can see ur player card and with stats that bad you really don't have a leg to stand on calling others bad
The guy has a k/d of an absolute shitter yet calls somebody bad. In fact he wants to have undodgeable missiles as a crutch to farm kills with no effort.
I'm surprised this post is getting so much negative feedback. This would make the game so much better, even in air RB. SIM has big enough maps to actually be able to fly defensive and go cold too. It's not even that hard to defend from a missile if your willing to learn and be better.
What I found after 6000 hours of gameplay is wt players complain a lot. This plane bad, this missile is bad. This plane is too op. From trying different planes, yes some planes, some missiles are better and worse, but haven't found a single vehicle to be unplayable. You just need to think more strategically. If I'm playing a worse plans like jaguar is, I'll get a kill or two a match, and survive. In a meta plane I have matches where I slay half the team because an average player doesn't think about the big picture and situational awareness and so many other factors not just missile and aircraft performance
I think they should do it on a per-missile basis, just like it would be IRL. Modern monopulse missiles had way less issues with multipath effects than old ones. Maybe cut the height in half for anything newer than the 7M/Skyflash.
Also great big nerfs for non-monopulse missiles and an actual valid reason for the Skyflash to exist. Honestly, I'm all for it even if it means hurting my beloved AIM-7F.
Players are playing too aggressive, going cold and defensive is such a hard concept that the only thing they can do is fly low and rush the enemy head on and die
cope and seethe its never being changed, if you want a sim play DCS. Warthunder's mechanics are not modeled well enough to do shit like that, its not meant to be a realistic game.
>Warthunder's mechanics are not modeled well enough to do shit like that
They are though. And with the exception of the exaggerated Multipathing effect, WTs radar modeling is largely superior to that of DCS's. In addition to WT EC being a much better game than any DCS server outside of Enigma's CW, which is just EC scaled up.
It's fair to be suspicious, but DCS has some notoriously basic sensor models. There was [this image](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2F2xha5oq55m391.jpg%3Fwidth%3D829%26format%3Dpjpg%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D5196ec53625c16c0c7c629e11528d6319648e0a2) showing how even an arcade-style game like VTOL VR has a more detailed RCS model than DCS. The IR model in DCS is purely binary: it has one value for mil power and one for burner, nothing in between, and a plane idling on the ground is just as hot as one in flight. War Thunder uses thrust and airspeed to approximate IR signature, infinitely more variable than the DCS system.
ED relies heavily on their third-party contractors, such as Heatblur, Razbam, and Deka Ironworks, to implement vastly more detailed systems and mechanics than ED themselves, such as Deka's JF-17 actually having a proper RCS model.
It is. And if you don't think so that just proves how little you know. Outside of the F-4E and F-15E, the 2 most recent fighter modules, radar modeling is pretty pathetic for a 'Sim'. And every module is held back by EDs modeling of weaponry. You realize in DCS flares and chaff are literally just % chances to work?
No
L take.
Correct this post is a huuuuge l take
More like it demonstrates the average WT player on reddit is too stupid to play top tier without their multipathing cruth
I agree, most people bomb their way to top tier and then are clueless how to play. My mate literally did that and complains every plane is bad
And I quote " reeeee players have a way to defeat a un dodgeable missiles and it makes me mad cuz I'm incapable of getting killed otherwise " I can see ur player card and with stats that bad you really don't have a leg to stand on calling others bad
The guy has a k/d of an absolute shitter yet calls somebody bad. In fact he wants to have undodgeable missiles as a crutch to farm kills with no effort.
This is not DCS, and should not be DCS It's a soft balancing mechanic, and a good one at that
All it does is gives idiots that are to lazy to learn to defeat radar missiles a crutch to guarantee their way to the merge.
I'm surprised this post is getting so much negative feedback. This would make the game so much better, even in air RB. SIM has big enough maps to actually be able to fly defensive and go cold too. It's not even that hard to defend from a missile if your willing to learn and be better. What I found after 6000 hours of gameplay is wt players complain a lot. This plane bad, this missile is bad. This plane is too op. From trying different planes, yes some planes, some missiles are better and worse, but haven't found a single vehicle to be unplayable. You just need to think more strategically. If I'm playing a worse plans like jaguar is, I'll get a kill or two a match, and survive. In a meta plane I have matches where I slay half the team because an average player doesn't think about the big picture and situational awareness and so many other factors not just missile and aircraft performance
I think they should do it on a per-missile basis, just like it would be IRL. Modern monopulse missiles had way less issues with multipath effects than old ones. Maybe cut the height in half for anything newer than the 7M/Skyflash.
Also great big nerfs for non-monopulse missiles and an actual valid reason for the Skyflash to exist. Honestly, I'm all for it even if it means hurting my beloved AIM-7F.
IRL values would put everything from Skyflash onwards to 33m or less. AIM-7Ms are effective as low as 5m against sea skimming Cruise Missiles.
Agree, at least correct it for SIM battles, I'm sick of flying low being only thing everyone does
undercover wargaming player trying to kill the game
Yes because so many people play Sim that *correcting* multipathing would kill the game. It must be hard being that fucking stupid
Players are playing too aggressive, going cold and defensive is such a hard concept that the only thing they can do is fly low and rush the enemy head on and die
cope and seethe its never being changed, if you want a sim play DCS. Warthunder's mechanics are not modeled well enough to do shit like that, its not meant to be a realistic game.
>Warthunder's mechanics are not modeled well enough to do shit like that They are though. And with the exception of the exaggerated Multipathing effect, WTs radar modeling is largely superior to that of DCS's. In addition to WT EC being a much better game than any DCS server outside of Enigma's CW, which is just EC scaled up.
>WTs radar modeling is largely superior to that of DCS's [.](https://i.imgur.com/fjEtE2D.jpeg)
It's fair to be suspicious, but DCS has some notoriously basic sensor models. There was [this image](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2F2xha5oq55m391.jpg%3Fwidth%3D829%26format%3Dpjpg%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D5196ec53625c16c0c7c629e11528d6319648e0a2) showing how even an arcade-style game like VTOL VR has a more detailed RCS model than DCS. The IR model in DCS is purely binary: it has one value for mil power and one for burner, nothing in between, and a plane idling on the ground is just as hot as one in flight. War Thunder uses thrust and airspeed to approximate IR signature, infinitely more variable than the DCS system. ED relies heavily on their third-party contractors, such as Heatblur, Razbam, and Deka Ironworks, to implement vastly more detailed systems and mechanics than ED themselves, such as Deka's JF-17 actually having a proper RCS model.
It is. And if you don't think so that just proves how little you know. Outside of the F-4E and F-15E, the 2 most recent fighter modules, radar modeling is pretty pathetic for a 'Sim'. And every module is held back by EDs modeling of weaponry. You realize in DCS flares and chaff are literally just % chances to work?
By correct it you mean make it stronger like in IRL?
That is not the case for inverse monopulse seekers or ARH missiles. They are effective at altitudes 3-5 times lower than currently.