Missile defense a bit overpowered

[Boozdeuvash]

I was attempting the Baltic Breakout scenario again (As NATO). I emptied four ASuW F35s and four ASuW Grippens on the single little frigate near the NATO naval group, and it shot every single missile down with its AK-130 in about 30 seconds. No missile used.

Now i'm not a military strategist or anything, but if that was possible, i bet no one would be using anti-ship missiles anymore in real life. It would be like using battleships in the middle of the cold war.

I'm having similar problems shooting at the Russian CGN group: I fired a total of 32 missiles (8 J-39, 8 F35) and only one of them manager to hit the Kirov class, with minimal damage. The salvo was well timed and bunched up

Same thing with my own little Visby: it shot down a metric crapton of P-700 ASMs with its CIWS system. I find Dangerous water had a pretty good depiction of the Phalanx and you would be very lucky if it managed to shoot down two Sunburns in a row. Five missiles inbound usually meant a nice trip to the oceanic floor.

The only thing I can think of is to overload my F-35s and try one truly massive strike but it takes a lot of time and my airbase are getting bombed by TU-22s.

so yeah, CIWS too strong

 

[unmerged(255172)]

Hi, and thanks for your feedback.

I think we should arrange a multiplayer tournament between the "missile defense is underpowered" and the "missile defense is overpowered" camps.

We have a bit of a debate on this forum going both ways.

There's certainly room for improvements, but the bottom line is that based on everything we know, the balance has tipped heavily in favor of the anti-missile defense side over the last decades. If it hadn't, you would not see your surface ships floating for long in this game.

 

[safferli]

I think we should arrange a multiplayer tournament between the "missile defense is underpowered" and the "missile defense is overpowered" camps.

We have a bit of a debate on this forum going both ways.

Great idea! The "underpowered" side will be the attacker, and the "overpowered" side the defender!

 

[Gimpstar]

Targeting incoming ASMs with cannons manually will kill almost all missiles.
Let the AI handle the cannons against incoming missiles, 50:50.

Mistral SAMs haven't hit a single incoming missile so far for me.

 

[unmerged(255172)]

Mistral SAMs haven't hit a single incoming missile so far for me.

I think I took out one missile with a Mistral one lucky day with a full moon.

To be honest, I don't think a Mistral SAM could ever take out a Klub sea-skimming missile in RL either.

 

[Boozdeuvash]

I looked again and it seems the behavior is really random. This one time I shot only four missiles at the frigate and two hit, two destroyed by CIWS.

Thats a bit weird.

If it hadn't, you would not see your surface ships floating for long in this game.

Honestly against the Russian Baltic fleet, expecting your ships to keep floating while putting them at range of their ASM would be pretty dumb. That would be fun if it were possible to hide in a fjord (well, Swedish Fjord) and fire the harpoons from there (you can fire a harpoon and give it a non-linear trajectory in the real life.)

Oh I would love to be able to place my units on start, or maybe start the mission two hours earlier so I can prepare better.

 

[unmerged(476215)]

I looked again and it seems the behavior is really random. This one time I shot only four missiles at the frigate and two hit, two destroyed by CIWS.

Thats a bit weird.

Without taking side in underpowered/overpowered debate about missile defense I have to say it should be random. There is nothing certain in warfare. Many factors can have an impact if the missiles get shot down or not.

 

[Boozdeuvash]

I took a closer look and it's not even an AK-630 CIWS, it's the AK-130 medium-caliber gun. With a 80% accuracy against missiles at 6000m.

Aha.

That's either a joke, a bug or a misplaced decimal point.

 

[Gorduz]

Yes I bellive the problem is not over vs under powered. I think the major complaint that the CWIS/RAM does not fire(which is an issue), not that it's to weak. And the other is that cannons are to accurate against missiles. 80% is ok against a boat but against missiles I would think 10-50% is more accurate.

 

[Elouda]

One of the issues is that the accuracy rating seems to be the same regardless of the target. Obviously a 200kph Helo is a much easier target than a 3000kph sea skimming missile.

 

[Gorduz]

I think it would be ok to have same accuracy against a missile, helicopter and fighter just make it different from a boat.

 

[Elouda]

Actually, I retract that statement.

If I read this right, any target with agility higher than the weapon (most missiles are 3-4, guns range from 2 for the 57mm Bofors to 4 on the Phalanx) incurs a 50% penalty to hit, and missiles as targets get a flat 30% penalty on top of that, down to a minimum of 10%?

Seems reasonably solid.

EDIT: Or is this only missiles vs missiles? Really should not be trying to do stuff like this on breaks, it inevitably leads to confusion and a headache.

 

[Gorduz]

nice! ok perhaps Ill do a test this evening

 

[unmerged(400752)]

Actually, I retract that statement.

If I read this right, any target with agility higher than the weapon (most missiles are 3-4, guns range from 2 for the 57mm Bofors to 4 on the Phalanx) incurs a 50% penalty to hit, and missiles as targets get a flat 30% penalty on top of that, down to a minimum of 10%?

Seems reasonably solid.

EDIT: Or is this only missiles vs missiles? Really should not be trying to do stuff like this on breaks, it inevitably leads to confusion and a headache.

Doesn't seems to be working this way. I was playing a single player scenario just now. I think it's the 3rd one where you need to destroy 2 enemy ship without losing 2 of you own. I was playing the Russian side and I was able to shoot down 6 incoming SSM with the gun on the Russian patrol boats with under 10 rounds fired. Same thing with the aircraft cannon. I manage to shoot down a fighter with 1 round from the SU-27's gun. I wrote up this problem and some propose fixed in the suggestion forum at this link:

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?601673-Guns-needs-major-revision!

 

[unmerged(320188)]

Mistral that cute little SAM a country with limited budget buy and put on their small newest fancy [yet cheap] frigate so it can have fancier anti air weapon than just shooting machine gun on them.

Of course it would work wonder against slower flying target like a helicopter and maybe even slower subsonic anti ship missiles deployed by many developing countries(like the old penguin missiles or old french exocet missiles though they may have probably expired by now if any in stock/depot)....

Buying mistral is like buying a fake insurance you get a sense of security but without the benefit of one especially when u play in war against beefy nation like Russia

I think those mistral are IR guided too...heee cheap little cute SAMs. I also believe there's version for ground troop too to carry. A terrorist would love one to launch at a Boeing 747 or an Airbus 380.

I don't mean to demean the warships in NWAC though because they are the best of their kind of sort. The frigates and corvettes and such are a league apart from say the newest of their South East Asia's counterpart. Europe always fields the best equipment because they can afford it and have the capability to develop them. But even then it's going to take much more than just a few fancy state of the art frigates to take on a Russian battlegroup.....American and Russian battlegroup now they were made to kill and defend against great odds. The cost of developing the technology is prohibitive to many smaller or even a conglomerate of smaller European nations not to mention the cost to actually produce and field them....Only 2 countries in the world can deal the most fiercest naval attack and defend againt them, Russsia(thanks to its cold war era warships such as the Kirov and Slava, etc) and USA. Japan has a few of the Kongo class [battle]cruisers but they are a few in numbers and basically derived from or directly from US technology transfer. South Korea also has developed their own [very] capable warship but again their numbers are very limited. They are not for waging global or sustained regional war. FOr Europe the British Type 45 looks very powerful and capable ship. I can't believe it doesn't come with towed array sonar....at least not in NWAC. Well maybe they'll operate those exclusively in battlegroup.

As for China it seems they haven't got a very powerful warship yet. This will change though by 2030(NWAC timeline)

Sorry for my ramblings yeah NWAC got me excited with ships again