HARM intercept

[thewood1]

The main issue is we have yet to see enough real world confrontations where a more modern SAM system goes against modern SEAD systems. That menas HW and doctrine. All the conflicts to date have been watered down on one side or the other.

[NakedWeasel]

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

You guys can actually do decoys now if you wanted. Just add a unit and disarm with the unit edit capabilities.

Mike

Mike, I'm not sure what this is referring to.... Do you mean TALDs?

[mikmykWS]

No decoy emitters and sites.

Mike

[NakedWeasel]

Wow, I'm totally not aware of this. Is this a DB entry? Are these facilities on the ground that act as decoys versus ARM's and the like?

[mikmykWS]

You can modify units in the game. So add a SA-whatever and then remove the mounts.

Mike

[NakedWeasel]

I'm guessing we are discussing these: http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com ... tters.html

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-SAM-DefA ... ocId671771

[mikmykWS]

No haven't implemented those specifically and not sure you'd have to go to the trouble.

Mike

Edit: Just added to our list though. Why not..sigh

[NakedWeasel]

[:'(] Hang in there, Mike.

[VFA41_Lion]

Dear developers,

when will you be modelling the Israelis' black magic that allows them to shut down the Syrian air defense network at will?

Thanks. [&o]


[:'(]

[mikmykWS]

That's actually been a item on our list since way early on. We're trying to determine how to implement correctly.

I think Tiller's Modern Air Warfare games had this but because of the mechanics of his game was a bit more straight forward to implement.

Mike

[NakedWeasel]

Saw that someone on a forum asked a great question: Why don't they make visually identical, self-propelled, heavily-armored versions of these emitters? Such a device could even be used as a lure to bring in aircraft that could then be targeted by hard-kill assets in the area. That's frightfully wicked. The expense and ordinance expended on such a thing would totally justify it's cost.

[VFA41_Lion]

Can't tell if serious or not... but EW sorcery simulation is something I can get behind!

[NakedWeasel]

I was being completely serious. Just adds an additional element of realism to the game.

[bvoid]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Quick question - are you raising such a ruckus when your SM-2/3s are shooting down DF-whatever (a _much_ faster target) in spades? If not, why not?

I was messing around with DF-21ds, and the yankee CTF could not shoot down a single one. For some reason they would not fire interceptors at all, but had no problem firing sams at enemy planes.

The DF-21ds had 100% hit ratio (1 malfunction) and pretty much blew up a ship with each hit. Are they supposed to be uninterceptable?

[thewood1]

It might be that the emitters themselves are so delicate, relatively speaking. If not built as a pretty close copy, I would think the EW systems would pretty quickly see the difference.

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: bvoid

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Quick question - are you raising such a ruckus when your SM-2/3s are shooting down DF-whatever (a _much_ faster target) in spades? If not, why not?

I was messing around with DF-21ds, and the yankee CTF could not shoot down a single one. For some reason they would not fire interceptors at all, but had no problem firing sams at enemy planes.

The DF-21ds had 100% hit ratio (1 malfunction) and pretty much blew up a ship with each hit. Are they supposed to be uninterceptable?

Did any of your ships carry SM-3?

Mike

[NakedWeasel]

A slight curiosity about aircraft EW... Apparently, the USN F/A-18E/F's are now carrying the ALE-55 towed EW decoy. But looking in the DB, I can't see it. Is that an oversight, or was it not included by design?

[AlmightyTallest]

A slight curiosity about aircraft EW... Apparently, the USN F/A-18E/F's are now carrying the ALE-55 towed EW decoy. But looking in the DB, I can't see it. Is that an oversight, or was it not included by design?

I think they took note of it in the DB3000 thread, I posted info on the system there the other day. Additional info on it's use and some specifics in this thread: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3571131

No haven't implemented those specifically and not sure you'd have to go to the trouble.

Mike

Edit: Just added to our list though. Why not..sigh

Lol, to be honest, I don't know how you developers keep up with all the info and so many systems to implement.

We do appreciate your efforts though.

[ckfinite]

Saw that someone on a forum asked a great question: Why don't they make visually identical, self-propelled, heavily-armored versions of these emitters? Such a device could even be used as a lure to bring in aircraft that could then be targeted by hard-kill assets in the area. That's frightfully wicked. The expense and ordinance expended on such a thing would totally justify it's cost.

This came from a slightly questionable source, but I've heard that the Chinese make very good radar simulades for a variety of systems, and that a number of countries have bought them. It would probably be cheaper to use an inexpensive simulade (not needing a receive side is a huge cost-saver) with some of the inflatable SAMs than it would be to armor a emitter.

[NakedWeasel]

No one could make the game perfect, but given time, energy, info, and heart- we can certainly make it damn close.