Maintenance and Reliability System for SAM Sites

[FlintMcgee]

I think it would be great if DCS added a maintenance or reliability system for SAM launchers and sites. For example, a poorly maintained system could have a chance for its missile to go off course, fail to detonate, or suffer from a miscalibrated INS. Things like that would make air defenses feel more dynamic, realistic, and engaging instead of always performing perfectly. It would also be nice if this feature could be configured in the Mission Editor, so mission creators could set how reliable each SAM site is. Having support for this in the DCS Scripting API would make it even better, allowing us to understand how it works and expand on it through scripts. This kind of system would add more depth and variety to missions, make air defense engagements feel more authentic, and even introduce a bit of a storytelling aspect.


(Marked Bold to skim read)

[Vakarian]

I would actually appreciate something like this but wouldn't stop on the SAMs, but expand it to the rest of the weapons? I already "don't like" making missions as I perfectly know that if I set X amount of targets that are spaced out, then the players need exactly X amount of weapons (clusters excluding) to kill them. Now, if few of the weapons just went dud, got hung on the rack, guidance failed.... That spices up the mission planning and really brings out the necessity of bringing your wingmen with you.

Basically the same thing you requested but expanded to all weapons. I understand it's a tall order and even if added to the roadmap it will be a long time, but still this is a wishlist section  We can dream

[draconus]

On 10/7/2025 at 4:41 PM, Vakarian said:

Basically the same thing you requested but expanded to all weapons.

Yes, please

[Gunfreak]

The perfection of AI does remove a lot of realism. Sadly making realistic AI seems to be hardest thing in any game, from old RTS, fighting games, shooters and sims(racing and flight) 

As it is now, there seens to be very little difference between best and worst AI settings on ground units, except their accuracy in firing of gund/cannons. 

Having learned about the RWR in the new MIG29. It's almost useless for anything except (stuff is out there) a human player will not have good SA in that thing. But the AI can interpret the RWR at light speed. 

Same goes for SAMs. SAMs when on, will never have any delay in finding out where the enemy is. No head scratching, no turning of diels  or looking through scopes in those old vacuum tube machines. Perfect modern computer accuracy and efficiency. And that's without taking into account that in some instances (cough Iraq cough) the crew simply refused to do what they were supposed to do or ran as soon as they understood they were being targeted (this last thing can be somewhat simulated with triggers we have now, but it not a straight forward process)

 

[Ornithopter]

Reliability issues could also be extended to weapons on the player side as well.  We've read of notoriously unreliable early Sparrows dropping off the pylons, duds, but I've never seen failures like this in the game.

[Gunfreak]

1 hour ago, Ornithopter said:

Reliability issues could also be extended to weapons on the player side as well.  We've read of notoriously unreliable early Sparrows dropping off the pylons, duds, but I've never seen failures like this in the game.

Even in the 90s there would be probably, i think 2 AIM-54s were fired during the gulf war. But failed in some way(mechanical not guidance if i remember correctly)