LOCERF Mission Planning and Dates

[Woodstock]

In order to keep up the momentum Fuddґs initiative gained, we should start planning the next event of the series early so that we can meet again in maybe 4-5 weeks and everyone has ample preparation time beforehand.

Of course everything should stay under Fuddґs guidance like coordination of date/time, selection of participants, etc.

[3Sqn_Sven]

3sqn is in again, and can again participate with a similar number of people (10+).

 

As the minor points of the missions, re-arms etc, whatever... it will never always be the one rule.

[vistrel]

Do you have replay tracks of Mission 1 ?

[Maximus]

I am in for good!

 

vistrel, You can find tacview mission in the first mission thread of operation red flag.

[159th_Viper]

In order to keep up the momentum Fuddґs initiative gained, we should start planning the next event of the series early so that we can meet again in maybe 4-5 weeks...

 

To quote Fudd: "The next mission is planned for June 23 2007..."

[Fudd]

So in this thread please post your suggestions and if your squadron is interested (no need to post numbers yet). For those of you who are not affiliated with a squadron, please PM me if you want to attend. Please include in the PM the aircraft that you wish to fly.

 

The date and time for LOCERF mission 2 is June 23 2007 at 2100 zulu.

[Laud]

Of course JaBoG32 will keep goin! :)

[S77th-GOYA]

The Savage 77th is fueled and ready.

[X-man]

504th is ready for it!

[159th_Fusion]

I think I can safely say the 159th are well and truly 'in' for the next mission and all the rest for that matter.....

[159_Archer]

I think I can safely say the 159th are well and truly 'in' for the next mission and all the rest for that matter.....

 

Well Fusion, the first RedFlag certainly had it 'in' for us...

 

Shallow-G having to drop out, me losing my connection, 3 planes lost in action and, of course, the 'new improved super-duper' AIM 7s!

[JonTex]

Well the Texanator is ready and fueled up ... just let me know what side I need to kill ....:D.

[Fudd]

As posted before, mission 2 will commence at 2100 zulu on June 23, 2007.

 

If your squadron is interested in participating please PM me with:

 

1) Number of pilots attending

 

2) What A/C they wish to fly.

 

I will make all efforts to accommodate them. Please be aware that due to the increased interest in LOCERF, I cannot guarantee that I will be able to honor every request.

THE DEADLINE FOR REQUESTS IS 2200zulu ON JUNE 4th.

One of the suggestions from the last mission was to give more time to planning and briefing, so I must get your numbers by that date. If I get your request late, I will not make any promises in providing slots to your squadron.

[S77th-GOYA]

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.

[159th_Fusion]

I guess that will depend solely on who's servers are available for us to use?

 

Perhaps, like RF1, we could have a show of hands as to who has a server and is willing to let us use it for RF2? Perhaps giving their physical location would also be handy to know??

[Fudd]

The server has not been finalized yet. We are looking at the option of securing a server that is powered by a C2D. We therefore expect that performance and bandwith will be such that we can accomodate more players with less warping/performance issues.

[Laud]

As we'll join from nearly all around the globe ping issues will never disappear completely. For the case no other/better server can be found the jabog32-server keeps available for "RF".

[Fudd]

THX Laud!!

[YorZor]

I think I can say that RvE is in once more to kick some ass :D

[beewee]

(504)X-man interesting; we're almost neighbours (I live in Mцlndal). Sorry, can't get the ц to work in Mцlndal...

 

So how about A10's, are they/we included or excluded from Red Flag #2?

[claycephus]

The 9th is in! Really looking forward to RF2 since we missed the first.

[X-man]

Nice Beewee! Gothenburg+surroundings rules :D

[S77th-ReOrdain]

More LOCERF suggestions . . .

 

Mission start time will be what it will be. Those that would like to participate must do what is necessary to try and be there. I’m confident that the organizers are doing what they can to try to accommodate as many pilots/squads as possible. That being said, to further encourage participation from as many “serious” pilots as possible, I’d like to suggest we consider an overall mission time of approximately 5 hours. I realize this creates an additional workload on whomever monitors the event, but it will allow for larger community participation. A few of the things I’d like to suggest for future events are:

 

• Each pilot or squad would only fly a maximum of 2-1/2 hours with 20-30 minutes being allowed prior to mission take-off time (assigned task/objective) to join the server and work out any connection issues (as suggested by Breakshot or Breadfan, I forget whom, sorry). The only exception to this would occur if a pilot failed to show. In that case, those already flying would be given the option of continuing and fulfilling the role of the assigned task.

• Pilot/Squad must take-off or taxi within 5 minutes of assigned task take-off time thus beginning their first sortie.

• If for whatever reason pilot/squad can’t taxi/take-off within this 5 minute window, they must withdraw from that day’s competition.

• No spectators should be allowed. I suggest this not to be a hard-ass, but instead to maximize the server’s performance for everyone flying by limiting the amount of pilots on the server at any given time.

• This would also encourage more “serious” pilots to participate that are not in squads. I’d hope that the intent is to open LOCERF up to as many pilots as possible as a “learning from a shared community” experience, without penalizing those that are not in squads. I suggest “serious pilots” because yahoos that would only join to cause mischief and mayhem is something we definitely do not want. Maybe screening would be necessary and I’m sure Fudd has a good handle on this (although, he may need some help if the number of interested pilots becomes too large).

 

So, potentially, a chart posting join time window, task take-off time, mission completion time and exit from server time could be posted for all scheduled participants, allowing for upwards of 60-75 pilots, but only a max of 40 or so would be in the server at any given time. A matrix can be worked out to better illustrate this suggestion.

 

• An ATC (another 504 suggestion) should also be in place for each side to ensure the above ROEs are followed. Violators will be reprimanded by being dropped from server (or flogged) whichever is more appropriate.

• Once the 5 hour mark has arrived, Red Flag concludes and scores are tallied.

• Rules on R&R, IMO, should be based upon the mission design and the squads that contribute the mission for that LOCERF session. ROE and Tasks/Objectives should clearly state what is appropriate and be discussed and reviewed by all participating pilots/squads. Everyone needs to take responsibility to know what’s going on. No excuses! You get severely penalized for not properly reviewing the Rules of Engagement regarding Rearming and Refueling.

• A severe penalty for Team Kills (-150), great idea.

• -5 points instead of -10 for missiles fired that don’t hit a target. -5 because, -10 would almost certainly guarantee a negative score for most participants flying fighters. A plane carrying a payload of 6 would potentially end up with -30 points instead of -60. If that plane scored a kill with the last missile fired, at least that pilot would end up with a score of +5 or +15, instead of -20 or -10. It would potentially end up being an even lower score for fighters carrying a payload of 8, 10 or 12 weapons. And keep in mind, this is just for one sortie. If that fighters role is to perform a CAP and maintain a defensive front he would most certainly be penalized attempting to effectively do so, or if the fighter is merely using his weapons in an attempt to survive. I do agree with the penalty for employing weapons that hit nothing (they cost $ right?), however I think -10 is a bit too severe in light of the score recieved if one of the missiles actually hit the target.

 

Remember, these are only suggestions and obviously open for discussion. Fudd can make the final decisions.

[rogue_blade]

just wondering how you will/plan to incorporate single players as in those not in squadrons. will be they be assigned to work with a squad or work as an individual or what. will they count as indigenous forces?

[X-man]

I’d like to suggest we consider an overall mission time of approximately 5 hours. I realize this creates an additional workload on whomever monitors the event, but it will allow for larger community participation.

I think 5 might be too long, we should probably stick to 3 for now atleast.

 

• Each pilot or squad would only fly a maximum of 2-1/2 hours with 20-30 minutes being allowed prior to mission take-off time (assigned task/objective) to join the server and work out any connection issues (as suggested by Breakshot or Breadfan, I forget whom, sorry). The only exception to this would occur if a pilot failed to show. Inalready flying woul that case, those d be given the option of continuing and fulfilling the role of the assigned task.

I agree on that pilots should have a window of 30min after mission start to join the server. Pilots then have alot more time to sort out their connection.

 

Pilot/Squad must take-off or taxi within 5 minutes of assigned task take-off time thus beginning their first sortie.

• If for whatever reason pilot/squad can’t taxi/take-off within this 5 minute window, they must withdraw from that day’s competition.

We should probably just stick to the "30 min after start rule" not to complicate things.

 

No spectators should be allowed. I suggest this not to be a hard-ass, but instead to maximize the server’s performance for everyone flying by limiting the amount of pilots on the server at any given time.

Agreed!

 

This would also encourage more “serious” pilots to participate that are not in squads. I’d hope that the intent is to open LOCERF up to as many pilots as possible as a “learning from a shared community” experience, without penalizing those that are not in squads. I suggest “serious pilots” because yahoos that would only join to cause mischief and mayhem is something we definitely do not want. Maybe screening would be necessary and I’m sure Fudd has a good handle on this (although, he may need some help if the number of interested pilots becomes too large)

How will the "non-squad pilots" fly? Will they be assigned to squads or will the fly alone -> HL air-quake:suspect:

 

An ATC (another 504 suggestion) should also be in place for each side to ensure the above ROEs are followed. Violators will be reprimanded by being dropped from server (or flogged) whichever is more appropriate.

I like it :D

 

-5 points instead of -10 for missiles fired that don’t hit a target. -5 because, -10 would almost certainly guarantee a negative score for most participants flying fighters. A plane carrying a payload of 6 would potentially end up with -30 points instead of -60. If that plane scored a kill with the last missile fired, at least that pilot would end up with a score of +5 or +15, instead of -20 or -10. It would potentially end up being an even lower score for fighters carrying a payload of 8, 10 or 12 weapons. And keep in mind, this is just for one sortie. If that fighters role is to perform a CAP and maintain a defensive front he would most certainly be penalized attempting to effectively do so, or if the fighter is merely using his weapons in an attempt to survive. I do agree with the penalty for employing weapons that hit nothing (they cost $ right?), however I think -10 is a bit too severe in light of the score recieved if one of the missiles actually hit the target.

Thats a good point.