Jump to content

Su-25 vs Apache Hellfires (strange behavior / possible bug)


Hardliner
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

 

all Apaches in the single missions as well as in the campaign behave oddly as soon they are attacked.

 

The Apaches reliably answer with heavy, super accurate air to air Hellfire craziness. Beside the simple fact that no hellfire on earth can hit an air target moving at 600km/h, no helicopter pilot would even try to get offensive against an air to air armed jet. This behaviour is absolutely ridiculous.

 

Just try it out, load a mission with Apaches as foes, try to attack one with a missile, turn away at full speed into the clouds and wait about 6-7 secs for a hellfire to hit your back with perfect accuracy.

 

This smells like a really stupid "cheating AI gone wrong" bug. I'm wondering if anyone observed the same issues. It is really a fun stopper for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually hellfires have been used in A2A for real - but it was against a cessna-like aircraft.

 

The 600kph isn't a big deal if you're not jinking and it's a tail-on or head-on engagement.

 

But this is definitely something to be looked at.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mhh.. I doubt this behaviour is really intentional. I can reproduce the issue with 100% probability, and the hellfire rocket doesn't care if it's full night, within a cloud or following a heavy manoeuvring aircraft.

 

To me, this issue looks more like a "we don't get the AI right, so let it cheat" side-effect. Same as the unnatural terrain following, infinite climb speed and power of all AI vehicles in the game during extreme situations. These things seriously disturb the otherwise great feel of realism in DCS World.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The seeker head looks where it's told do, depending on the launch mode. The missile uses PN navigation, which is just fine for engaging aerial targets. It is not an AAM, but has been used against aircraft in one incident that we know of.

It should certainly not be very effective when used in this way, especially against a maneuvering target or one with a lot of crossing angle.

 

'Absolutely wrong' is actually a matter of degrees.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WTF? Who said anything about "low" mode, for that matter what are you even on about?

 

You fire the guidance laser, the missiles locks onto the reflected laser energy, that's all there is to it. The missiles neither knows, or cares, if that laser energy is coming from above, below, left or right. If it's in the seeker FOV, it's in the seeker FOV.

 

Now as to the missile actually being able to hit the target, that's another matter entirely.

 

Spoiler

Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Xtreme, Intel 9900K (5Ghz), 64Gb 3600Mhz, MSi RTX 3090, Schiit Modi/Magi DAC/AMP, ASUS PG43UQ, Hotas Warthog, RealSimulator FSSB3, 2x TM MFDs + DCS MFDs, MFG Crosswinds, Elgato Steamdeck XL

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

addressing the comment that no helicopter pilot would dare go offensive against a fast mover, I beg to differ: the helo pilot has to know he'll never outrun the jet, and he'll never outmaneuver it, so in that situation, you have two options: 1) dive and try to hide in terrain, or 2) turn and fill the air with lead and hope the jet jockey decides you're too risky a target to take on. If caught over flat terrain, or surprised at close range and unable to hide, they have little choice but to fight. It's either that, or wait to die.

 

...but yes, the AI helo pilots are unnaturally good gunners, and spot you way, way before they really should. And this goes for the Russian attack helos in DCS as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christ, why does everyone on these forums always deny the existence of glitches that they don't experience personally.

 

Yes, a helo pilot may in *certain, extreme* situations target a jet in self defense, and yes, in rare situations ATGMs may be versatile enough to threaten slow jets.

 

But the AI of helicopters routinely and reliably creates absurd situations where pilots make unrealistic decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christ, why does everyone on these forums always deny the existence of glitches that they don't experience personally.

 

Yes, a helo pilot may in *certain, extreme* situations target a jet in self defense, and yes, in rare situations ATGMs may be versatile enough to threaten slow jets.

 

But the AI of helicopters routinely and reliably creates absurd situations where pilots make unrealistic decisions.

 

In principle, I agree with you - this should happen rather rarely. But the fact that you got hit means that the firing solution existed - so the helo pilot actually made a right decision. In practice, this only means that we're supposed to engage helicopters at a greater range or maneuver more aggressively (and yes, it's not only Apaches, Hinds engage airplanes with their thingamajigs too. And tanks engage helicopters. And Tunguskas engage Kh-58s... and so on).

 

I personally prefer plinking helicopters with Vikhrs, there's no dodging that :). I can only imagine AI helo jockeys complaining in their AI heaven "but he shot me with Vikhr! WTF man!" :).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're over-estimating the capability of AI to make decisions. There are limits to everything unfortunately.

On the contrary, I'm criticizing ED's lack of constraint over AI decisionmaking. When an AI chopper sees incoming fast movers, their first reaction should be to *hit the deck.* There should be factors discouraging the decision to engage in head-on confrontations with enemy jets, preferring to run towards terrain or friendly AA. I mean, jet AI knows to hit the deck when flying SEAD missions towards enemy SAMs. And why is the default altitude for placing choppers in the mission editor and generator 500m? That's half the problem. They're suicidal from the start.

 

In principle, I agree with you - this should happen rather rarely. But the fact that you got hit means that the firing solution existed - so the helo pilot actually made a right decision.

Hold on a minute. A firing solution existed for the completely imaginary avionic and fire control systems that the AI uses to launch its weapons. We can't know for sure without talking to an Apache gunner IRL, but the AI has perfect awareness and perfect aim when using his weapons. All sorts of factors that would make the employment of Hellfires against a fast, maneuvering target unfeasible in real life are not present in the sim. It's a somewhat poor point of reference, but hitting a jet with a SACLOS guided ATGM in any other sim (ArmA, Steel Beasts) would be almost unimaginable.

 

In practice, this only means that we're supposed to engage helicopters at a greater range or maneuver more aggressively

Right, but the Hellfire has twice the range of the R-60. In the hands of the AI, a dedicated ATGM is a better anti-air weapon than an IR-seeking anti-air missile. Think on that.


Edited by maturin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...