AIM-9X in latest ED video

Ouch.

phoenix is perfectly capable against fighters, except maybe at extreme ranges where it won't have the speed to maneuver against you.

modeled realistically, i feel like it's going to ruin multiplayer because every single AAM in the game is basically going to be a joke compared, and this is doubly true if hornet gets a better AIM-120C along with it.

red at that point might as well be flying mig-17s.

phoenix is perfectly capable against fighters, except maybe at extreme ranges where it won't have the speed to maneuver against you.

 

 

modeled realistically, i feel like it's going to ruin multiplayer because every single AAM in the game is basically going to be a joke compared, and this is doubly true if hornet gets a better AIM-120C along with it.

 

 

 

red at that point might as well be flying mig-17s.

Yup, even the current in-game 120c won't hold up well because of the inordinately high drag all missiles experience (don't remember where I saw this nor can I find it but the number that keeps popping up in my head is like around 50%) additional drag. And when you add this with the immediately terminal guidance and no lofting.... well you get the infamous 5-7nm aim120

Boy DCS has so much to improve, new engine for graphics but all the rest is from 2003. Why is that exactly?

Cause all the latest stuff is classified?

Boy DCS has so much to improve, new engine for graphics but all the rest is from 2003. Why is that exactly?

Many reasons...some still classified and some too demanding with current hardware. Also keep in mind a lot of it is upgrading things that have been around in the game for quite some time now (coded for old engine, etc), which is arguably harder than starting from scratch.

Just because this reminded me of the good old days of Mavericks, when you could lock TV through clouds and hit from 12nm.

Yes, manouevering, strike aircraft....

9X should be fun with the Helmet mounted sights in VR.

Maverick likely can take down fighters, but not maneuvering ones. So if target is flying steadily it shouldn't be impossibility to hit at them.

 

As we anyways have a problem in DCS that players are pulling way too much G's and maneuvers because they can, as they don't have the effects of the maneuvers nor G forces, what would leave so many to avoid maneuvers when not needed.

 

And if hitting a maneuvering target would be so easy, we wouldn't have got missiles like AIM-9X and R-60/R-73 that are designed for high maneuvering targets at close range.

Loading it on the Hornet right now is EZ, just that you can't get them to work as their avionics is not integrated yet.

Same goes for the Slammer, with the difference that the avionics is already partially in.

well you get the infamous 5-7nm aim120

AIM-120B is superior to anything else in the game. AI can launch it from 1500m altitude from 20-30km distance at you, while you fly 3m from the ground, behind the trees that are 20-30m side of you, 90 degree angle to the missile / beaming, dropping chaff and at final seconds bursting chaff, and the AIM-120B (and C) will perfectly track you all that time for the kill.

As well the F-15C AI can launch a AIM-120C from 25nm and hit you, while you have nothing with Hornet to even get close at them.

AIM-120B is superior to anything else in the game. AI can launch it from 1500m altitude from 20-30km distance at you,

I would like to see this 20-30km shot hitting you in an acmi or trk, I'm dubious at best. I'm not saying that it didn't/couldn't happen... but I would like to see the launch parameters as this should be an easy shot to beat even with just beaming.

while you fly 3m from the ground

To your first point on altitude.... the seeker should have total resistance to ground clutter as I don't think its modeled (as far as I can tell) for the aim120 if it even would impact it irl. Yes, getting low can be effective as it could make you hard to see to enemy radars and will give you the most air to work with for maneuvering but this alone won't beat an active missile in game.

behind the trees that are 20-30m side of you,

To your next point unless the missile is coming at you nearly level (very unlikely) those trees won't save you.

90 degree angle to the missile / beaming, dropping chaff and at final seconds bursting chaff, and the AIM-120B (and C) will perfectly track you all that time for the kill.

To your third point of beaming and dropping chaff.... It is very hard if not impossible to beam an active radar missile as its constantly moving and as such the radar is constantly moving. To notch an aim-120 or even a radar requires pretty much a 0kt closer rate. This means it is nearly impossible to successfully beam an aim120 or even the R77 adder. I've actually never seen it done personally in the game for the aforementioned reason. Overall though the seeker on the aim-120 is really good both irl and in game. So in game this is represented by a VERY low chaff effectiveness on the missile.

As well the F-15C AI can launch a AIM-120C from 25nm and hit you, while you have nothing with Hornet to even get close at them.

ehh I don't trust the range as I've said before I would need to see the acmi to believe it but the last point on the Hornet not having anything to match the aim-120 is totally true and hopefully will be fixed soon.

Sorry for the long post :music_whistling:

Wasn’t this thread about the 9X?

lol guys stop comparing it to the Phoenix and enjoy what we have the way it is. It’s gonna get improved eventually but bitching about it in every single thread won’t make it happen sooner.

I think there are a couple of missing texture threads that don’t have posts bitching about draggy missiles in them but that’s it.

Wasn’t this thread about the 9X?

lol guys stop comparing it to the Phoenix and enjoy what we have the way it is. It’s gonna get improved eventually but bitching about it in every single thread won’t make it happen sooner.

I think there are a couple of missing texture threads that don’t have posts bitching about draggy missiles in them but that’s it.

Why BVR combat gets as well affected with improved WVR missiles.

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

Boy DCS has so much to improve, new engine for graphics but all the rest is from 2003. Why is that exactly?

Yeah, crazy that everything's exactly the same as LOMAC.

Nothing's improved in that time other than the graphics...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles and the introduction of the trigger system...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles and the introduction of the trigger system and the introduction of the scripting engine...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles and the introduction of the trigger system and the introduction of the scripting engine and the modelling of PRF and aspect on radar performance...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles and the introduction of the trigger system and the introduction of the scripting engine and the modelling of PRF and aspect on radar performance and the ability to guide multiple missiles A2A...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles and the introduction of the trigger system and the introduction of the scripting engine and the modelling of PRF and aspect on radar performance and the ability to guide multiple missiles A2A and the introduction of JTAC support...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles and the introduction of the trigger system and the introduction of the scripting engine and the modelling of PRF and aspect on radar performance and the ability to guide multiple missiles A2A and the introduction of JTAC support and buddy lasing in MP...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles and the introduction of the trigger system and the introduction of the scripting engine and the modelling of PRF and aspect on radar performance and the ability to guide multiple missiles A2A and the introduction of JTAC support and buddy lasing in MP & new FM's for A2G missiles...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles and the introduction of the trigger system and the introduction of the scripting engine and the modelling of PRF and aspect on radar performance and the ability to guide multiple missiles A2A and the introduction of JTAC support and buddy lasing in MP & new FM's for A2G missiles and increased resolution of terrain and increased object density...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles and the introduction of the trigger system and the introduction of the scripting engine and the modelling of PRF and aspect on radar performance and the ability to guide multiple missiles A2A and the introduction of JTAC support and buddy lasing in MP & new FM's for A2G missiles and increased resolution of terrain and increased object density and 3 new maps...

I mean nothing except for the graphics and the detailed aircraft system modelling & the advanced FMs and the 6DOF clickable cockpits and the introduction of player controlled ground vehicles and the introduction of the trigger system and the introduction of the scripting engine and the modelling of PRF and aspect on radar performance and the ability to guide multiple missiles A2A and the introduction of JTAC support and buddy lasing in MP & new FM's for A2G missiles and increased resolution of terrain and increased object density and 3 new maps and the start of a WWII TOW with piston aircraft...

etc. etc.

But yeah, apart from those things, E.D. have been sitting on their hands, because apart from the graphics, it's obviously exactly the same code as LOMAC.

Graphics ain't everything. Yes, it is amazing the progress DCS has made especially in multiplayer stability (my community I fly in has been markedly impressed by this) in the diversity of aircraft, and yes graphics. BUt core gameplay features have not been touched much since I've been here. That's what we're all upset about... we're tired of the very poor missile modeling in regards to kinematics and guidance that just ruins BVR... And I know there are plenty of small things such as AI logic, the mission editor lacking niceties such as the ability to change coalitions after you make a mission, and damage models for modern aircraft all add up. This is what needs fixing... it seems that this has seeped in a little bit as recently Mat Wagner has stated that you guys have made a good sim but not a good game.... and that is true and hopefully you will begin to fix the stuff that makes DCS not as much fun as BMS in many regards.

I will kindly hear that :)

It may seem that way, but actually there have been a lot of changes, but not all of them have been as successful as E.D. might have wanted.

PFMs changed A2A, as did the introduction of over G damage (not to everyone's pleasure :))

Radar modelling is different (LOMAC had no RWS / TWS, no PRF changes, no impact of PRF on detection & no multi-missile guidance), ECM was changed (partially to defeat an exploit), A2A missiles had their FM's changed & those are modelled in a more detailed manner & I believe kinematically are a neared match to published data - unfortunately that revealed issues with the guidance that are still to be fully addressed & didn't increase the fidelity of A2A combat as much as they'd have hoped.

I agree though, it would be nice to see some development in the A2A missile guidance area to increase the utility of real life tactics on the SIM...

this thread is so far derailed...

It is, and why the AIM-9X will be a game changer for Blufor as they get their R-73 clone in use.

Why BVR combat gets as well affected with improved WVR missiles.

 

 

 

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

Of course but opening a discussion everywhere about the bugs affecting missiles isn't useful or appropriate. More so when the bugs have been recognized and are being worked on.

Besides blufor wasn't so handicapped in wvr fighting with the 9M in any serious way. And now they get something that is at least a gen ahead of the R73. Hardly a level fighting field with opfor in any distance anymore.... Even with the AIM120 energy bugs not sorted yet.

There's no point to discuss different eras. F-18 is mid 2000s (the most modern fighter in dcs) while FC3 aircraft are early 90s.

F-18C is not supposed to fight against FC3 aircraft. We will never get red opponent for it, so I guess you on blue side will be fighting against each other.