S77th-GOYA

The LOCERF Mod is a replacement meinit.xml file that enables all flyable planes to coexist in opposing coalitions. Additionally, it enables all ground forces to be in opposing coalitions. It does not edit any existing files in a LOMAC installation. It is a ModMan package that when installed, backs up the existing meinit file and two graphics files (that will make it plainly apparent that the mod is installed), and replaces them with the LOCERF mod files. It is easily, quickly and completely uninstallable through ModMan. The existing countries in the meinit file are not changed in any way. The mod works by adding "countries" to the meinit file. For example, "RF Russia Red", "RF Russia Blue", "RF USA Red", etc. New flags have been added to represent the added RF countries. The reason for the LOCERF Mod is that the Su-33, A-10 and some ground forces can only be placed in one coalition with the default meinit file. The mod will eliminate the unfortunate occurance of some pilots being forced to fly a plane that is not their main ride. Many of us feel most comfortable in a certain aircraft and will not perform to the best of our abilities if unable to fly that aircraft. I believe that everyone should be able to bring their "A Game" to RedFlag. This enables everyone to fly their main ride regardless of which coalition they are assigned. Using an alternate meinit file is something that is not to be taken lightly and that is the main reason for this post. I wanted to make sure that everyone understands what the mod does and doesn't do. This is a pared down version of the LomacLeague Mod made by S77th-Dante that has been time tested by many of us in the community. I personally have had the LL Mod installed for years and have flown online with it with absolutely no problems. So have the rest of the S77th and very likely many other members of the community. I expect some will resist any changes to their installation and I would like to hear from those that would not like to see this mod utilized for RedFlag and discuss the reasons. Please believe me, I was reluctant to install it for the first time and I understand why some may be hesitant. Hopefully, we can all come to an agreement and get the most out of RedFlag for all of us.

So do we. I'm not suggesting US v Russia as a plane set. There would be plenty from here flying Russian planes.

Why wait? They're screwed up equally for both sides, aren't they?

I would guess that Russia (and nearby countries) would get a pretty decent ping to JaBoG. Depending on where in Russia, of course. If it is a problem, perhaps the number of clients could be reduced a bit.

At what point should the English Forum challenge the Russian Forum? :)

Do we know which server will be used? Because of ping/connection problems associated with the first mission, some folks may or may not sign up if they expect that they will not be able to participate.

The Savage 77th is fueled and ready.

Gentlemen, Please move the Red Flag thread back to to main forum. It's the biggest boost in interest LOMAC has seen in a long, long time. It deserves to be a prominent thread in the prominent forum without having to look for it. This applies to any future threads as well regarding this exercise which effects the entire community. Thank you for your consideration S77th-GOYA

I understand completely that for strike aircraft waiting for an opportunity to proceed to target that it can be pretty boring. Believe me, SEAD flight did a lot of circling and waiting too. Ultimately it comes down to using some of the flyable aircraft in an unrealistic way. Su-25s and A-10s would not be anywhere near the kind of enemy fighters we saw. The US side would have SEAD from F-16s and Russia would have a fast mover SEAD platform as well. We have to compromise to get everyone in the mission. Perhaps having a mission goal for fighters to provide a certain amount of time for their strike aircraft to work could be an answer.

It took your fighters more than 30min to get to the area. I understand that there were problems with the server in the beginning that delayed flights on both sides but better planning could have helped that. Had we had fighters in the air, our SEAD strike would not have turned back at the beginning of the mission. We would have had plenty of time to get the Pats out early. But as it played out, your SAM coverage kept us from pushing across the channel whether or not your fighters were in the area until the 2:17 mark (or so). My initial response to your post was only to point out that simply saying the Red's objectives were closer is very misleading without describing other aspects of the situation. I was at Anapa, where were you, hippie? :D

I believe the goal would be to improve our abilities to work with other squadron's to achieve a goal. Fighters on both sides showed a lack of planning and strategy that will likely be improved upon in future exercises. But remember, better planning and strategy may not result in more kills because defense is a part of it as well. I salute your patience. I just wish we could have sent you to the engagement area sooner. Rugg, I'm not complaining about the Pats and Hawks. We knew that we were facing an initial disadvantage. I'm just pointing out the reality of the situation from RedFor's perspective.

Just remember that RedFor's objectives were under the protection of two Patriots and two Hawks. BlueFor's primary objective could be reached without fear of enemy SAMs. It was part of the planning to give RedFor a disadvantage that was to be overcome by superior SEAD capability. It just didn't turn out that way. Other than that, I agree. Unlimited rearm/refuel does not restrict the employment of any tactics. If GG wants to show us how it's done, next time he can choose to participate.

Roger that, Airman Cali. :D

I wonder how many negative points a teamkill is going to be in the scoring. Maybe Red won. :D

The thing that is immediately apparent to me is that if my initial SEAD flight had been reckless and proceded to launch point without any fighter cover, we had the whole sky to ourselves for plenty of time before BlueFor fighters were on station. Not that I'm second guessing my decision to wait because I would make the same decision again given the same situation. Still, I can't but think... :doh:

Big Salute to Fudd. Thank you for your tremendous job of coordination. Another big salute to JaBoG for hosting the mission and TS, and 504th for hosting RedFor TS. Congrats BlueFor. And congrats RedFor for a good effort. Was anyone from Australia able to participate? I know of two that had to leave early because of ping/connection problems.

If any recordings of the mission are made, I suggest one person be designated as the recorder so we don't have 12 guys all running tracks.

There is something that needs to be said and no one has said it yet. So, I will take this opportunity to make it clear to everyone who is and also who isn't participating in this exercise: BlueFor drinks gutter water. :pilotfly:

Also please clarify wind speeds. kph or m/s?

Would it be possible for each squadron leader to get a copy of the mission with all OpFor removed?

Will the no respawn rule mean no payload changes during the mission?

Your PC will likely be in a museum when BS is released. Or perhaps I'm jaded.

There could be a modman compatible Red Flag mod that would make all planes flyable for either coalition, similar to the LomacLeague mod.

Why would you get MiG-29S and we not get F-15? Just let Fudd handle it and deal with what you get to work with. Remember what you just wrote?

No, it would not. Take the 120 away from the 15s and then you must limit the Russians to R-27Rs. There is no way to do a NATO v Warsaw and be exactly even. I'm more worried about the total number of planes and turning it into a lagfest. If the server we use is decided upon, it should be tested in a mock battle with the same planeset and similar amounts of ground forces.