Apache flares to good vs AA?

[bullet purveyor 85]

I tried this mission Mountain Warriors made by CoffeeCat the other day.

And halfway through you are supposed to shoot down a Apache with Stinger AA missiles, wich turned out to be rather hard.

The Apache defelcts all incoming missles like it has a magnetic shield because of its flares.

After 3 attempts and 12 missles fired I gave up and started up the editor to see if it was a bug in the mission.

It turned out that that you need at least 5 AA soldiers to take it out!

In this scenario it took 10 to bring it down, but in other map locations 5-6 is enough:

Is flares really that effective?

[Ulanthorn 10]

Is flares really that effective?

I dont know how effective Flares are in reality, I just know that im very often shot down by one sigle MANPADS in simulations like DCS: Blackshark or Lock On 2.0 using flares. I would like to say flares and countermeasures are way to effective in ArmA: OA and Aircraft have much to high hitpoints to chew from.

[maturin 12]

Crap, did you see those missiles doing an about-face in about 50m? I only wish they were that agile when tracking the aircraft itself!

And how many countermeasures do helicopters and single-seat jets carry in real life? 100 flares is practically a force-field when they're that effective.

[nkenny 1051]

Given the secrecy surrounding the STINGER weapon system and the nature of Apache counter measures I'm guessing its classified ;)

Whether the current implementation is good or bad for gameplay is a totally different discussion.

-k

[max power 21]

Wow... I've never seen behaviour like that- or so many flares being shot. Are you using mods?

[bullet purveyor 85]

No mods that should affect missiles and weapons. Only soundmod is supposed to be active in this test.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Yes, countermeasure systems have to be effective even in games/simulations.

Tested this mission from CoffeeCat three times: 1-2 Stingers were enough to get the Apache down. Please test this mission without any addon/mod - only to be sure. ;)

[bullet purveyor 85]

My bad! :o Looks like some addon is screwing up the flare system.

Disabled all mods now and it was pice of cake to shoot down an Apache. :D

I only run units, veichles and aircraft mods.

Don't use any AI or effects mods, so I don't understand what is causing that effect?

Maybe some of the RKSL addon is implementet in some of the aircrafts that I have in my addon folder. Strange that it should affect BIS Apache though.

[rksl-rock 1300]

My bad! :o Looks like some addon is screwing up the flare system.

Disabled all mods now and it was pice of cake to shoot down an Apache. :D

I only run units, veichles and aircraft mods.

Don't use any AI or effects mods, so I don't understand what is causing that effect?

Maybe some of the RKSL addon is implementet in some of the aircrafts that I have in my addon folder. Strange that it should affect BIS Apache though.

Did you have the rksl-arma2.pbo installed?

Those aren't RKSL flares. They look like Mandos to me.

Edited December 15, 2010 by RKSL-Rock

[UNN 0]

Our flares certainly don’t deflect missiles 180 degrees, not unless you specifically set them up to do so in the missions description.ext. If you’re using any RKSL addons, I suggest you get them from an official source. Also we don’t spam particles like that.

Our flares look completely different:

P.S You can also turn our flares off. They are designed not to clash with the BI version, which looking at your video, those flares do.

Edit:

What about these, the elaborate missile smoke trails seem as equally elaborate as the ones in your vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0PpflsAaQg

Edited December 15, 2010 by UNN

[bullet purveyor 85]

I think I found the mod causing the effect. This little bugger was in my @aircraft folder: dbo_counter.

After a quick google search http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=6642

So if anyone wants godmode helicopters, this is the addon you need :)

[Ulanthorn 10]

I think I found the mod causing the effect. This little bugger was in my @aircraft folder: dbo_counter.

After a quick google search http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=6642

So if anyone wants godmode helicopters, this is the addon you need :)

The default aircraft are godmode enough already.

[sprayer_faust 0]

Even the vanilla flares are way too effective against heat-seeking missiles because:

1) Pilots usually pop flares before/after strafing runs to prevent locks by heat-seeking manpads. As it is, they are mostly using them to shake the missiles off after they have already locked themselves - which is a worse tactic because:

2) Once the missiles are locked (especially the new generation), it is hard to shake them off - they also have UV tracking (stinger) or magnetic fuse (igla) to distinguish between target and dummies.

3) There is a super-effective (even if the threat has passive homing) missile launch detection system on every aircraft, which automatically drops off flares.

4) The missiles are too weak. As if the manufacturer forgot to fill them with the explosive fragmentation head. A frontal hit should (at least sometimes) kill the pilot and the rear hit should do more than just disable the rear rotor (or in the case of an airplane: puff some smoke). The destruction (and flare resistance) can be seen here:

or here

.

5) It is ironic, that the missiles can be fooled so easily in game, when their high resistance to countermeasures is pointed out on the official arma 2 webpage: http://www.arma2.com/arma-2-oa-weaponry/a-2-oa-ataa-launchers.html .

These manpads are a joke to pilots in PvP games. I don't even know how many of them it takes to bring down an attack helicopter with a rear shot (as they are supposed to be fired), because I have never seen it happen. Another indicator is, that these missiles cost less (pvp games) than smaw or gustav rounds ---> mission makers know how ineffective they are.

I'm considering to use the m47 dragon against enemy helicopters. Then at least if I hit, I'll get the satisfaction of a kill.

[maturin 12]

That said, the result of a MANPAS strike in highly variable.

There's a photo from the Russia-Georgia war of a Russian Su-25 that took a direct hit from a Strela. The missile carved out a hole in the side of the fuselage large enough for several people to sit inside. The plane landed just fine.

I think an issue with Manpads in-game is that they often don't hit you directly. Even without flares, they like to shoot past and explode with a proximity fuse. Direct hits will always make a chopper's engine cut out, in my experience.

[max power 21]

:)

[Ulanthorn 10]

:)

Something let's me think that this pilot did not even consider to fight on. but ArmA pilots do since airplanes in ArmA have a sigle Health bar that missiles chew away, but the plane is fully funtional as long as 1 hp is still on the bar.

So there is no point in aborting a attack just because you got hit three times in ArmA..and it gets better,,,just put off engine and youre under cloak...

Gunner: Hull is at 33% Captain!

Captain: uncloak, energize shields, fire pulse phasers and photon torpedos, evasive manouver Riker Omega. (thats at least how aircombat feels for me most of the time in ArmA II)

[max power 21]

That's not precisely true...

Helicopters become less powerful as their engine is damaged. They can accrue fuel leaks. As their rotor gets damaged, they start to get increasingly sluggish, and they can lose their tail rotor. Their glass loses its armoured properties as it gets hits, and as its electronics go, you lose your instrumentation.

I don't remember in ArmA 2, but the vehicle HUD in arrowhead has a single bar for fuel, then blocks representing hit locations that change colour as their components get damaged.

I think the damage effects should be more severe.

[mr burns 131]

Gunner: Hull is at 33% Captain!

Captain: uncloak, energize shields, fire pulse phasers and photon torpedos, evasive manouver Riker Omega. (thats at least how aircombat feels for me most of the time in ArmA II)

*points at sig* :D

Fun aside, i find AI using countermeasures far more effective than humans.

That´s mainly due to AI not needing to watch radar or listen for warning signals, they get an instant order to fire flares from the engine and thats it. If the players missile isn´t fired at a good angle, it´ll be deflected.

Players using flares to deflect missiles are having a much harder time, theres moments you´re not watchin the radar and warning singals can be inaudible..

From that point of view it´s the old "my AI treats me unfair" issue, they look through grass, sense you through buildings, and know instantly if a missile is headed their way. In a PvP environment though it works fine for both sides, but that wasn´t the point of this thread..

So, thumbs up for better everything :bounce3:

[der.hannes 10]

i cant say that its working fine in MP, at least from gameplay.

you can often see airplanes (with humans inside) in warfare flying over enemy base at a big height, while thousands of stingers dont hit them.

for me my first reaction when i see enemy aircraft scince OA, is to get a big mg rather than a stinger...

[CarlGustaffa 4]

@Max Power:

Not really a pilot so excuse my ignorance or lack of common knowledge here, but should maybe targeting and fire systems go unavailable with increasing instrumentation/electronics damage? As far as instrumentation goes, this is completely useless (and often way wrong) in the game anyway, at least for vanilla.

As for effectiveness, especially against AI pilots, I don't know. I'd like some sort of randomness to the AI pilots reaction times, so that proper (?) tactics can better pay off (wait until close enough, impacts his reaction time so that missile will hit before he reacts). On the other hand, the predictable charging attack style of AI pilots make them incredibly easy to fight anyway, even if you're not doing it with manpads.

[max power 21]

@Max Power:

As far as instrumentation goes, this is completely useless (and often way wrong) in the game anyway, at least for vanilla..

I was thinking the same thing when I was writing that post, which is why I put the last sentence there. When an aircraft gets damaged, you really want to put it down soon. I would like to see something like if the turbofan or rotors get damaged, they progressively wear out... I guess that's a bit like having 10 different avenues for a fuel leak, but still...

[Ulanthorn 10]

That's not precisely true...

Helicopters become less powerful as their engine is damaged. They can accrue fuel leaks. As their rotor gets damaged, they start to get increasingly sluggish, and they can lose their tail rotor. Their glass loses its armoured properties as it gets hits, and as its electronics go, you lose your instrumentation.

I don't remember in ArmA 2, but the vehicle HUD in arrowhead has a single bar for fuel, then blocks representing hit locations that change colour as their components get damaged.

I think the damage effects should be more severe.

I said AIRPLANES! Airplanes in ArmA use shield technology and structural integrity fields. Engines on aircaft can not cease and planes dont have fuel leaks...planes are monolitic blocks in ArmA II

[max power 21]

So you did. I read 'aircraft'.

[sprayer_faust 0]

In a PvP environment though it works fine for both sides, but that wasn´t the point of this thread..

Yes ... It works just fine! An expensive smart weapon with a nearly 100% fail rate as soon as some flares are popped. I bet every general would want a stockpile of these for his army.

I think the damage effects should be more severe.

That is an understatement. When countermeasures are deployed after lock, the missile should have a 3/4 hit rate for helicopters and 2/4 for airplanes. After a hit, in 3/4 cases both would plunge down --> making the missiles kill ratio about 55% for helicopters and a little less than 40% for airplanes. In the remaining 1/4 cases after a hit, the aircraft would be severely damaged, but could make it back to airbase.

[Fireball 16]

Dear Community,

Your ideas and concerns are not unheard and could probably most likely realized if you vote on these (or of course other) CIT tickets in sheer masses:

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/12692 (Countermeasures too effective)

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/15976 (Flares shall have enemy signature)

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/15980 (Aircraft armored too well, take too many AA hits)

All you need is a nickname, a password, an, if you're new to the CIT, an e-mail address. :bounce3:

-Fireball