Modern Warfare Mod 3 brings World in Conflict from the Cold War into the Modern Age. It also ups the ante on realism and authenticity in every role – Infantry, Armor, Support and Air, while trying our best to keep everything relatively balanced for fun and interesting gameplay.

  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
Media RSS MW Mod 3.2 - Advanced Flight Modeling for SAMs
Comments
DeltaForce95
DeltaForce95 Sep 16 2012, 11:58pm said:

how do people dodge these things? it seems near impossible to get away from these ased on te videos

+2 votes     reply to
blahdy
blahdy Sep 17 2012, 12:15am replied:

Fly low and if you see missile trails coming towards you, immediately pop countermeasures and get out of the area. There are plenty of ways in dealing with them, I'll post a video later.

Also, don't try to attack these things with helicopters. Your best option is to use ballistic missiles to attack them, while fixed-wing SEAD aircraft feeds them HARMs to degrade their defenses.

+2 votes     reply to
DeltaForce95
DeltaForce95 Sep 17 2012, 12:57am replied:

are sams really that good? I mean I hear about those anti missile missiles(and see your videos) and just go, have they evolved that much since desert storm? I mean patriot battery claims are appearently exaggerated greatly and your stuff seems flawless
Not saying the work isn't amazing I do love watching these videos and it makes me itch more and more to buy WIC

+2 votes     reply to
blahdy
blahdy Sep 17 2012, 8:05am replied:

Yes. And they are not *that* great in game either, it's roughly 70% effectiveness.

Most people don't understand the Patriot claims. First, Patriot effectiveness were under exaggerated by those with an agenda during Desert Storm. Majority of the engagements resulted in missile passing within lethal blast radius of the explosive, many times, flat out exploding right on the target. The problem was the steep ingress, high closure rate (Mach 10-11 closing velocity between the two), where speed of explosion was unable to catch up with the closing velocity to effect a warhead kill.

In 2003 OIF, the improved PAC-2 GEM missiles had 100% success rate, and you don't seem to talk about it, probably because you didn't know (most people don't, as media didn't report much). The missiles Saddam had fired in 2003 OIF were similar in ballistic and speed profile to the SS-21 Tochka used in WiC. Given the 100% intercept rate and nobody to dispute those claims, our portrayal in game is backed up by real life combat data.

+2 votes     reply to
blahdy
blahdy Sep 17 2012, 8:08am replied:

Secondly, most people who under-exaggerate Patriot performance have no clue nor understanding of why.

Ted Postol, the idiot professor from MIT that is 100% behind all anti-Patriot claims in the media, would use an invalid metric where you count the number of Patriot missiles fired, vs. the number of targets hit/intercepted.

This is a retarded unit of metric, because in every SAM engagement in history, you *ALWAYS* salvo or ripple fire 2 to 4 rounds for every target. This is true against aircraft, cruise missiles, air-to-surface missiles, etc.

If you watch the above video again, and listen to Ted Postol's claims, the Patriot SAMs in World in Conflict game would have a hit rate of 10% or less. And according to his claims, the Patriots in game have to fire 4-6 rounds for every incoming ballistic missile, so the best effectiveness is already down to 20%.

The reason why you salvo / ripple fire multiple SAM rounds against incoming missile is because of a military-physics metric known as "battlespace". With a target coming down at Mach 3.5 to Mach 8, there is insufficient battlespace and time for another SAM to take off, get up to speed and into position to intercept, *if* the first one missed. So to make sure you got the engagement right, you fire two SAMs, so that if first one was to miss, the 2nd one is already in position to go at it again.

The salvo/ripple engagement is clearly demonstrates Postol's inability to understand how Anti-Aircraft Warfare works in real life, nor does he have any valid military-scientific facts to back up his claims. The proper way to judge SAM's effectiveness is instead, number of engagements performed (engagement counted by per radar track engaged), and the number of enemy missiles made through the SAM screen and hit the protected areas.

If using the latter unit of metric, Patriot effectiveness was at least 70% in Saudi Arabia as the Army claimed during Desert Storm, not 10% as Postol claims.

+2 votes     reply to
roycewicz
roycewicz Sep 17 2012, 9:44am replied:

also bear in mind that our videos are mostly demonstration videos, not gameplay videos. so we'd only show you one-sided story, which is the story where sams or code works perfectly and doesnt fail.

what you don't see on the demo video are times when patriot misses completely. gameplay videos would show you balanced story and i've been pushing for more of them to be made.

+1 vote     reply to
Post a Comment
click to sign in and comment

Only registered members can share their thoughts. So come on! Join the community today (totally free - or sign in with your social account on the right) and join in the conversation.

Description

YouTube: Youtu.be

Details
Type
Promotional
Date
Sep 16th, 2012
By
blahdy
Length
01:03
Filename
afm_sam.mp4
Options
URL
Embed
Share
Subscribe
RSS Feed