Unavoidable T-80 rockets

[STP Dragon]

Hi testers,

 

please try to reproduce:

 

Open the editor and:

- add a T-80

- add a Ka-50 Client to ca. 800m above ground

 

Run the MP (I don't know if this problem exist in SP).

 

Get in range of the T-80 at high altetude and wait till the T-80 is shooting with this rocket.

Once the rocket is on the way, pull down the collective, pull down your nose and go into a extreme freefall dive to avaid the rocket.

-> It will hit you to 100%

 

 

In my point of view this is unrealistic.

 

The BMP-2 for example is using a equal type of rockets and you can avoid it by simple fly sidewards with 50Km/h.

 

Trackfile needed?

Edited February 13, 2012 by =STP= Dragon

[159th_Viper]

In my point of view this is unrealistic.

 

There's the problem: Issues cannot be adequately addressed by having regard to your point-of-view. Rather, we need substantiation based on fact.

 

The BMP-2 for example is using a equal type of rockets

 

Incorrect.

 

T-80: AT-11 Sniper--Laser Beam Rider--340m/s

 

BMP-2: AT-4 Spigot--TOW--80m/s

 

 

There is no way you are going to avoid the 9M119 by attempting to 'free-fall' out of the way ;)

[STP Dragon]

A Vikhr with 800m/s is using a beam ride also and you have no change to hit a enemy Ka-50 in a free-fall dive. Is this then realistic?

 

But I'm speaking not only about realistic/unrealistic.

I'm speaking about ballancing of the game too.

It is not possible to avoid this rocket. You have NO CHANCE to get away from it.

If you get lasered by a tank you can pull the eject button!

Edited February 13, 2012 by =STP= Dragon

[159th_Viper]

I was addressing the T-80 issue.

 

In any event, you are discounting range in your hypotheses.

 

 

I'm speaking about ballancing of the game too.

 

I somehow do not think that the majority will favour dumbing down weapons for the sake of 'balancing'. I certainly cannot base a bug report on it.

[STP Dragon]

I was addressing the T-80 issue.

 

THX

 

Do you still need a track?

[takamba]

The question is, is the actual behaviour of the AT-11 realistic or not?

 

If yes, wow, they are more efficient than a Stinger and I think no missionbuilder will ever use a T-80 for a mission again.

[159th_Viper]

 

Do you still need a track?

 

No - there is no bug to report.

 

Herewith track illustrating T-80 engagement with 3 x 9M119 evaded by manoeuvring, one at 850mAGL/1.5nm, another at 240mAGL/0.8nm and another a wee bitty closer.

 

Track: 3x9m119 evasion.trk

[Eddie]

The question is, is the actual behaviour of the AT-11 realistic or not?

 

Depending on the exact scenario it certainly could hit a helicopter, however it shouldn't be able to hit you from several Km away while you're performing rapid manoeuvres, especially if you have the missile/launch platform on the beam.

 

However, the problem with things like this is finding exact specifications of its capability.

[sorcer3r]

Dragon, it is possible to evade this type of missile. :)

 

watch my track: http://www.file-upload.net/download-4112066/client-20120212-150806-missiletest.trk.html (from mission time 06:10)

 

but it seems to depend on some netcode "randomness":

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1399123#post1399123 ?

[159th_Viper]

 

but it seems to depend on some netcode "randomness":

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1399123#post1399123 ?

 

That is awfully strange :)

 

Did you notice the R-27(ET)? 2 seconds into that clip in F6 view?

[sorcer3r]

That is awfully strange :)

 

Did you notice the R-27(ET)? 2 seconds into that clip in F6 view?

 

Launched by Su-33 but not on me. ;)

[159th_Viper]

Launched by Su-33 but not on me. ;)

 

Aahh OK - I assumed that the code maybe mixed up the missile types or something.

 

Ta for clarifying :)

[sorcer3r]

Aahh OK - I assumed that the code maybe mixed up the missile types or something.

 

Ta for clarifying :)

 

np :juggle: