Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

[Crescendo]

It's not just kinematic problems. When you're missing straight flying targets that literally don't do anything inside NEZ you have a real problem. There's another set of retarded behaviours with loft aswell.

 

No, this is a SIM and it's all about realism and especially having realistic defenisve behaviour.

 

A while ago I asked whether it was a matter of balance as the reason for the AIM120's short range and was quickly shot down by GGTharos, although my question was sincere. In any case it's NOT supposed to be a matter of balance, we would all like to use the weapon as it was meant to be used in a SIM environment.

 

I'm not saying that the problems being talked about aren't real, nor am I saying that kinematics are the only problem. Furthermore, I'm not actually talking about realism and balance whatsoever. I certainly do not advocate making the game 'balanced'. War is not balanced or fair; each side can and should try to use the best weapons, technology, and tactics to completely dominate their enemy.

 

What I am saying is that even if all missiles were 100% realistically modeled (all missiles, not just the AIM-120), from one perspective these missiles will still be "useless" when players learn the new missile envelopes from testing and playing the game.

 

Rare exceptions aside, having realistically implemented missiles will not improve your K/D ratio unless the other side is criminally stupid and makes no effort to adapt. On average the better pilots will still defeat the less-skilled pilots, the only difference will be the precise tactics and engagement ranges used in the new missile environment.

 

To a large extent I agree with you. As a general rule things are relative. If you suck/pwn now then it is likely that unless your flying and fighting ability changes intrinsically you will still relatively suck/pwn later when all the missiles are improved. Saying that we should strive to more realistic missile behaviour

 

Exactly.

 

Although to be clear, I do advocate making the missiles as realistic as possible, and I do not think the game should be balanced.

 

My sin here is making a point that is only tangentially related to this topic, albeit one that is in my opinion quite illuminating about the mindsets of some people who get involved in these reoccurring missile performance arguments. I'm talking about the people who take partisan positions about their missiles for their aircraft of choice. I think these people, and it's a not-insignificant number, want their missiles to be as realistic as possible because they think it will help them get more kills (fallacy), not just because it's the correct thing to do in a simulation context.

Edited May 23, 2014 by Crescendo

[karambiatos]

I'm talking about the people who take partisan positions about their missiles for their aircraft of choice. I think these people, and it's a not-insignificant number, want their missiles to be as realistic as possible because they think it will help them get more kills (fallacy), not just because it's the correct thing to do in a simulation context.

+1ing you on that, it does seem like that from just reading, seems most people arent at all interested in a balanced discussion, they want their favorite missile fixed, and want the rest of the missiles to stay crappy.

[TAW_Blaze]

Fixed kinematics won't have much of an effect other than extending everything to further ranges, as you say. Guidance fixes may have a major effect however. Right now in a lot of situations you have to be a daredevil and push even though your shot should have been a certain kill. But that missile forgets about his target. But that missile lofts 30 degrees up then pulls 90 degrees down, and ends up at 600 knots falling down. This is the REAL problem. I don't mind having poor flight performance that much, but the guidance logic failing SO bad for no apparent reason is just a bummer.

 

Firing a missile even under the perfect parameters feels like rolling a dice.

[karambiatos]

Fixed kinematics won't have much of an effect other than extending everything to further ranges' date=' as you say. Guidance fixes may have a major effect however. Right now in a lot of situations you have to be a daredevil and push even though your shot should have been a certain kill. But that missile forgets about his target. But that missile lofts 30 degrees up then pulls 90 degrees down, and ends up at 600 knots falling down. This is the REAL problem. I don't mind having poor flight performance that much, but the guidance logic failing SO bad for no apparent reason is just a bummer.[/quote']

 

when your missile is doing that, look at whats happening to the plane you want to shoot, hes probably jumping around like crazy (because of a bad connection), so the thing that makes the bad missiles worse, is the netcode.

[TAW_Blaze]

when your missile is doing that, look at whats happening to the plane you want to shoot, hes probably jumping around like crazy (because of a bad connection), so the thing that makes the bad missiles worse, is the netcode.

 

Quite possible, indeed. But it can happen even when there's no visible lag on his side (well, I guess that doesn't mean he didn't lag).

[karambiatos]

Quite possible' date=' indeed. But it can happen even when there's no visible lag on his side (well, I guess that doesn't mean he didn't lag).[/quote']

well you almost never notice lag on your side, but other people will see you lagging, the amount of people ive had dodge my missiles or force me to lose lock (they shoot up into space) because they lag out is staggering.

[IASGATG]

Fixing the kinematics is easier than fixing the navigation, especially for stuff like lofting. Don't get me wrong, going from pure to anything isn't that difficult, but going to something that doesn't wreck energy and plays smart is hard work to code.

[GGTharos]

On average, an AIM-120 platform should be defeating a non-AIM-120 platform.

 

On average, team tactics with AIM-120 platform should be defeating non-AIM-120 platform.

 

Case used to produce a statistical graph for the missiles back before the WAFM. I'd say things were pretty 'fair' back then, and they still are. And why? Because the platforms don't really reflect the technological disparity.

 

On average the better pilots will still defeat the less-skilled pilots, the only difference will be the precise tactics and engagement ranges used in the new missile environment.

[TAW_Blaze]

well you almost never notice lag on your side, but other people will see you lagging, the amount of people ive had dodge my missiles or force me to lose lock (they shoot up into space) because they lag out is staggering.

 

You misunderstood me. What I mean is, that even when the bandit looks like he's not lagging he may still be having some minor lag that isn't visible to you, but still affects the guidance. Now if that's possible or not, I don't know.

[MVSokie]

my words are vague and meaningless? thanks for that completely useless and meaningless response, sorry i asked, i shall seek help elsewhere.

[Frostie]

so what is the real issue with aim-120s right now? i myself play a mission setup with 4 IL-76 in spread formation constant speed and alt, I go up with 8 120s. i can hit most of them every time but its only light damage and they fly away unless i gun them down.

You don't state what parameters you fire at the target. Rule of thumb is to get higher, faster and closer and try then. The problem happens if your missiles lose energy then the proximity hit margin will be greater so effectively causing less damage.

 

my words are vague and meaningless? thanks for that completely useless and meaningless response, sorry i asked, i shall seek help elsewhere.

I'm not sure why he posted that response but it may be misconstrued and probably wasn't meant in a derogatory manner, don't let one persons response affect you.

Edited May 23, 2014 by Frostie

[MVSokie]

I'm not sure why he posted that response but it may be misconstrued and probably wasn't meant in a derogatory manner, don't let one persons response affect you.

 

Thank you, I was only trying to gain a little knowledge on the F-15 and have a little fun with it. I have been doing a mission someone created I found in the Download section to practice TWS mode and for the most part have done everything succesfully except actually down the enemy planes unless I finish them with guns.

 

Edit: didnt have time to post more earlier, the mission is simple, 4 IL-76 at 15k direct course, there is a friendly in the middle of them, AWACS is available too, take off and you head straight too them, they are headed directly too you basically chicken, i locked them up when in range and fire, most times i hit 3 of the 4 but only minor damage, I fire a second time and get similar results, very rarely do they go down, most times they fly away trailing smoke. is this normal?

Edited May 24, 2014 by MVS=okie=

[karambiatos]

You misunderstood me. What I mean is' date=' that even when the bandit looks like he's not lagging he may still be having some minor lag that isn't visible to you, but still affects the guidance. Now if that's possible or not, I don't know.[/quote']

could be, but from what little i've observed, there's always a bit of lag, and you can always see it.

[Exorcet]

Thank you, I was only trying to gain a little knowledge on the F-15 and have a little fun with it. I have been doing a mission someone created I found in the Download section to practice TWS mode and for the most part have done everything succesfully except actually down the enemy planes unless I finish them with guns.

 

Edit: didnt have time to post more earlier, the mission is simple, 4 IL-76 at 15k direct course, there is a friendly in the middle of them, AWACS is available too, take off and you head straight too them, they are headed directly too you basically chicken, i locked them up when in range and fire, most times i hit 3 of the 4 but only minor damage, I fire a second time and get similar results, very rarely do they go down, most times they fly away trailing smoke. is this normal?

 

DCS damage model can be pretty simple for some AI units. They have a health bar and some have parts that can be destroyed (like engine and cockpit). Cockpit hits are certain kills, at least against fighters. Engine hits hurt performance (for jets, I'm not sure about the Fw-190). If the health bar isn't drained, the enemy will continue to fly. Large units tends to have larger health bars so that would explain why the Il-76's keep flying.

 

Keep in mind though, in real life, a mission kill can be as good as an actual kill. In DCS it's up to you or the mission designer to decide what's good enough.

[MVSokie]

Thank you that helps alot.

[IASGATG]

my words are vague and meaningless? thanks for that completely useless and meaningless response, sorry i asked, i shall seek help elsewhere.

 

It's a very specific arena you're talking about. There are six variables that instantly come to mind that have to be accounted for. It's like saying "How come my race car didn't go around the track in 4 minutes?" "Well, because you have flat tyres."

 

My words aren't meant to be offensive, merely to express that the vagueness of your question makes it impossible to decipher anything. More information is needed to make an assessment.

[Falcon_S]

FC3 R-27ER NoEscape Zone - TEST result: 24 missiles / 24 missed

 

Gentlemens, this is unacceptable. :(

 

 

This is really sad. Explains all doubts about the ideal conditions for the launch - there are no ideal conditions for R-27ER. Nothing else I can not say. Had at least one hit - but no. Something is definitely wrong. I know that the developers take some data from reality but is the R-27ER bad in reality like as in DCS?

 

WE have every day many situation when we see how our ER dont go on the target, second too, thrid too... - and now i know if i have 24 ER`s too 99% no Kill. ER can kill only sitting target.

 

Ok, you will told me is not easy to kill, but you have kill`s, and happens ... but this Is not enough reason to missiles thoroughly analyze and adapt their capabilities?

 

I do not want to start a any war here, but to determine errors if they are errors.

 

Posted Track file here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2073853&postcount=14

FC3 - R-27ER test2.rar

R-27ER missile test 2.miz

Edited May 24, 2014 by Falcon_S
Posted track

[Haukka81]

Wow. I knew that missiles are wip but after your test im sure that they are broken badly. :(

[Kuky]

let me guess... they all go for chaff?

[Falcon_S]

let me guess... they all go for chaff?

 

No chaff bro :). Im just flying trough them.

[Svend_Dellepude]

Looks like all AI loose radar lock. What is their skill level?

[Falcon_S]

AI Skill level - EXCELLENT

 

Radar lock is not a problem. The problem is that the missiles can not follow the target for some reason. I have many situations on the servers, i have lock but missiles wont go on the target.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Falcon_S

[Axion]

Knew they were bad, but that is just...

 

I'm sure there is a perfect and logical explanation for this behaviour? Let's see what the 'experts' have to say.

[Svend_Dellepude]

Try to do the same mission but with more room for the AI to get up to speed. I think you'll se a different result.

Can you post the mission too?

[Falcon_S]

Mission posted. Improved speed of AI give same results, tested.