On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Sleksa
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2265
Joined: Tue 14 May 2013 12:26
Contact:

Re: On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Postby Sleksa » Sun 12 Feb 2017 23:51

HrcAk47 wrote:
Sleksa wrote:
antizombies_boy wrote:I like the idea of 5HE for all the AIM-9 series. +1


This skews the difference in lethality massively for the blufor aircraft in comparison to redfor, of which a large portion is flying around with 3he missiles and missiles with same HE values but a lot worse accuracy. Imagine what the difference would be with a MiG-21 armed with 4x R-60's and a F-4 armed with 4x Aim-9E's. Both have terrible accuracy, and one of them needs 4 hits(or 3 with massively good cannon rolls) for a kill while the other needs 2 hits for a kill.

Instead, a drop in price for a lot of low end fighters coupled with higher availability would be a better way to make a lot more aircraft viable.


The "R-60 problem" is a great issue indeed. At the very least, both R-60 and R-60M can be at 4 HE, because the difference in warhead weight is minuscule.

Another workaround that can be done is ripple firing R-60s.


Base R-60's are already theoretically ripple firing, but their lethality is still much smaller than some 4HE aim-9s because of low accuracy. The problem isn't just with the R-60's though as a lot of eastern aams are already simply inferior due to generally 10-20% lower accuracy than western counterparts, giving them a 1-2HE advantage on top of that would only further skew things up.

Razzmann wrote:I fail to see it being a problem. There is barely a plane using it where it would actually matter.


In current situation it is indeed a low priority because a lot of lower end aircraft are generally not worth it because of way too high price compared to their use.

However if red dragon is going to get any further balance patches along the road, the inclusion of this change coupled with others could skew things a lot in favour of blue while leaving red hanging, and considering how wargame franchise has historically treated redfor, it's not really a welcome thought.
Image

thelizardofdoom
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat 2 Apr 2016 10:15
Contact:

Re: On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Postby thelizardofdoom » Mon 13 Feb 2017 02:08

Is this even a good idea at the base level though? Is it good for gameplay to have a plane from the 1960s be able to engage 1980s aircraft?

Doesn't seem good for logic at least.
Yes im aware my grammar and spelling are dreadful. Email complaints to android for having terrible software or eugen for having a mobile unfriendly site.

Sleksa
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2265
Joined: Tue 14 May 2013 12:26
Contact:

Re: On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Postby Sleksa » Mon 13 Feb 2017 02:10

thelizardofdoom wrote:Is this even a good idea at the base level though? Is it good for gameplay to have a plane from the 1960s be able to engage 1980s aircraft?

Doesn't seem good for logic at least.


The year of manufacture isn't as clear cut of an attribute as you make it sound out to be. One example being MiG-17's and19's vs brand new F-105's over Vietnam.
Image

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Postby Killertomato » Mon 13 Feb 2017 02:25

Things are more fair at close quarters. Not that fair, since all-aspect missiles are a thing, but more fair.

Of course, getting there is half the fun.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

Guggy
General
Posts: 8645
Joined: Thu 17 Nov 2011 02:53
Location: peaceful skeleton realm
Contact:

Re: On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Postby Guggy » Mon 13 Feb 2017 02:29

Do away with the Bonus damage crit totally, imo.

User avatar
Xeno426
Carbon 13
Posts: 11965
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 21:27
Location: Acheron, Hadley's Hope
Contact:

Re: On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Postby Xeno426 » Mon 13 Feb 2017 07:13

Should note the AIM-9B, AIM-9F, AIM-9E, AIM-9J, AIM-9P were all ~4kg warheads, and probably should stay at 4HE.
Image
CloakandDagger wrote:And you're one of the people with the shiny colored name. No wonder the game is in the state it's in.

User avatar
molnibalage
General
Posts: 6700
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 22:54
Location: Hungary
Contact:

Re: On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Postby molnibalage » Mon 13 Feb 2017 10:48

antizombies_boy wrote:I like the idea of 5HE for all the AIM-9 series. +1

Long, long time ago should get at least AIM-9L 5HE. Why?

  • It had/has 100% same warhead as AIM-9M. Is no reason why has 4HE.
  • 4 HE makes simply impotent some A cat ASF (Gripen, F-4KWS and as I can remember one of Scand F-16) which has only 5HE AIM-120 + 4 HE AIM-9L. They cannot kill with 2 hits any airplane while other ASF for any era can.
  • Only AIM-9 capable ASF with 2-4 AIM-9 should have killing capability (or Tornado). With 2x4HE missiles giving AAM for any AC just a bad and useless idea. They do not have any usable capability just makes more expensive the airplane. Strange that for a long time Tornado had unreal 4xAAM (now has only 2x) while Su-24 never had AAM even it can carry 2-4xR-60. I guess because creators knew it would just useless so small and few AAM. Tornado simply should loose AIM-9s as long as they do not have 5HE.
  • 4HE is the heritage of ALB where only AIM-120 + AIM-9M or AIM-7 + AIM-9L existed. The first is 5+5 HE the second is 6 + 4 HE = 10 HE, both made cabable to kill AC with these AAMs. Only problem in RD the fiction was less for some countires and they stucked with

This is simply insane. For ex. an F-4KWS is almost garbage comparing to Rafale or F-16C Blk52. because of this. Against target with 30-50% ECM that + 1 hit counts a lot.

IHMO even the smallst and older R-60 should get 5HE just give worse base ACC 5% what it would deserve, about 35%. It is simply bad that with an AAM you cannot kill even a paper 4HP UH-1. It is also makes pointless and just make expensive USSR MiG-21 with does not have real AA capability.

Xeno426 wrote:Should note the AIM-9B, AIM-9F, AIM-9E, AIM-9J, AIM-9P were all ~4kg warheads, and probably should stay at 4HE.

I do not agree. Because of absraction +1 hit for killing is simply a way to big gap between airplanes. Even in cat C any ASF or AC with 4HE AAM is simply garbage. Even against a 0% ECM target the chance of killing with 4xAAM with 4HE wit 4XP (+24%) with 35% base ACC missiles is only 0,18%. This is garbage, nobody ever would use such AC. Even with 5HE and 2 hits to kill the change for kill is only 36%.


Against 0% ECM targets...
While even in Cat C 20-30% is not so rare...
If most of players do not like or hate era games is pointles to leave in such airplanes in DB which are used by nobody espeically if most player wish to make old crap stuff at least barely useable in Cat A games.

Just imagine any SHORAD with less than 5HE. Who ever would use it...? Same case for airplanes.

User avatar
Xeno426
Carbon 13
Posts: 11965
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 21:27
Location: Acheron, Hadley's Hope
Contact:

Re: On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Postby Xeno426 » Mon 13 Feb 2017 16:21

molnibalage wrote:Even against a 0% ECM target the chance of killing with 4xAAM with 4HE wit 4XP (+24%) with 35% base ACC missiles is only 0,18%.

That argument only applies to the AIM-9F and AIM-9E, though. The AIM-9B has 30% base accuracy while the AIM-9J and AIM-9P has 40%. You also did your math wrong; 0.18 is the chance that exactly three missiles hit, not 0.18%. You should have written 18%, and even then if you have four missiles then the chance that at least three hit is 22%.

It should be noted with +24% accuracy, the chance two or more missiles hit is over 50%, leaving only two health pips left. Many BLUFOR aircraft with AIM-9s also have the M61A1, which allows them to clear off those two points quite easily.

With the AIM-9J or AIM-9P, the chance three or more missiles hit is 31%, while the chance at least two hit (leave two health) is 68%.
Image
CloakandDagger wrote:And you're one of the people with the shiny colored name. No wonder the game is in the state it's in.

User avatar
molnibalage
General
Posts: 6700
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 22:54
Location: Hungary
Contact:

Re: On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Postby molnibalage » Mon 13 Feb 2017 16:44

Xeno426 wrote:
molnibalage wrote:Even against a 0% ECM target the chance of killing with 4xAAM with 4HE wit 4XP (+24%) with 35% base ACC missiles is only 0,18%.

That argument only applies to the AIM-9F and AIM-9E, though. The AIM-9B has 30% base accuracy while the AIM-9J and AIM-9P has 40%. You also did your math wrong; 0.18 is the chance that exactly three missiles hit, not 0.18%. You should have written 18%, and even then if you have four missiles then the chance that at least three hit is 22%.

Yes, I used the wrong value, but honestly 18% vs 22% you think is so different...? Nope.

It should be noted with +24% accuracy, the chance two or more missiles hit is over 50%, leaving only two health pips left. Many BLUFOR aircraft with AIM-9s also have the M61A1, which allows them to clear off those two points quite easily.

I considered the +24% bonus. 0.35*1.24 = 0.43 This what I used as sinle probability and I checked the calc for at least 3 successes.

Even against 0% ECM if you AC also suffered hit gun is qute usless. Against ECM fighter with AAM just ornament. I cannot remember last time when I saw gun usage in cat A environment..

With the AIM-9J or AIM-9P, the chance three or more missiles hit is 31%, while the chance at least two hit (leave two health) is 68%.

In case with 35% base ACC, 4XP and 5HE the chance of killing against a 0% ECM AC is stil olny 57% in case your ASF is not been hit (lowered morale).

And as I have said except some crap minor nations in cat C 20-30% ECM is not rare. With 4HE AAM achieve kill is almost impossbile even with high veterancy. Can you guess why have all SHORAD at least 5HE? Because in case with 4HE even a pair of high veterancy SHORAD vehilces would be very, very hard to kill any AC above 20-30% ECM.

It is simpy a very bad apporach to me to let SAMs allow such killing capability while you not allow for SR IR AAM (some ASF has only SR IR AMM) such capability while they have to fly inside of enemy SAM zone to launch missiles many times...
Last edited by molnibalage on Mon 13 Feb 2017 16:49, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

Re: On the rebalance of air-to-air missiles

Postby HrcAk47 » Mon 13 Feb 2017 16:48

Only USSR and China get 5 HE SHORADs, both proto.
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 40 guests