Air Strikes via Teamspeak - Help w/TS, pls.

[StrikeFear]

PLEASE, Read thru post 6 before voting or posting.

The IDEAL GOAL is to have some way for any squad leader to contact all VMFA-531 members on their team (thru TS) to request an air strike, and for the pilots to all hear it and for any of them to be able to reply back via TS immediately - all this without anyone hearing the conversation except the pilots and the SL.

I thought I knew the ideal solution - but it doesn't work.

There are several near-ideal solutions, but I can't figure out a way to make it ideal, nor am I sure which compromise we should choose. Let me describe the non-working ideal solution and enumerate for you the other possible solutions that I can think of, along with their associated disadvantages. Pls give me your thoughts.

The ideal doesn't work!

• SLs whisper to 531 channel. Pilots use a "Bind last whisperer to preset 0" and "Whisper to preset 0" combo.
  DisadvantageOnly ... it doesn't work, cuz TS doesn't consider a "Whisper to channel" as a whisper that can be bound to a preset.
  So SL1 whispers to channel FINE. But Pilots cannot bind that sender to a preset. Doesn't register.

----------------------
Other possibilities:

1. SLs set up a key to "Whisper to player list" and add all members of VMFA-531 to that list. (There are 4 currently). That way, the whispers are personal, and pilots can respond by binding and whispering - no matter WHO it was.
   DisadvantageSLs must keep up with roster changes.
   DisadvantageWhat if the pilot is NOT currently in a jet squad? He's getting airstrike requests, but he's a medic.
   Possible solution:Post a sticky of not just VMFA-531 pilots, but ANY pilot who wants to be available for airstrike requests. The list would be TS nicknames, not in-game names. Hence, pilots could have special TS nicks used ONLY when piloting. That would, of course, require that they logout/login whenever they start/stop piloting.
   DisadvantageWhat if the pilots are on opposite teams?
   
2. We could establish set names for any pilots willing to receive airstrike requests. SLs set up a key to "Whisper to player list" and add all those set names (which never change). Pilots log into TS using any of those nicks which are available. Then they will receive whispers and can bind and whisper to presets. This will also allow pilots and SLs to sit in whatever channel they like.
   Suggested nicks could be:
   USMCPilot1
   USMCPilot2 ...etc up to 6(6 pilots in a jet squad could take turns)
   OpForPilot1, 2, etc.
   Disadvantage Requires pilots wanting to receive airstrike requests to logout/login.
   
3. SLs and Pilots are all "Channel Commanders" (CC).
   Then, by using "Whisper to Channel Commanders in Channel Family", the air strike request and response could take place.
   Disadvantage But all SLs who were Channel Commanders would hear the conversation with other squads as well. They don't need that clutter.
   Possible solution:SLs toggle CC on to request and discuss. Then turn it off.
   Disadvantage ne1 toggling CC would be able to listen in on the traffic.
   Disadvantage But there would be no way to distinguish USMC from MEC if VMFA-531 (or anyone else using this) were on both teams.
   
4. SLs set up keys to switch to/from the VMFA-531 channel and conduct requests like that.
   DisadvantageCurrently no TEAM distinction (USMC or MEC/China). We could set up two airstrike channels, instead. (AirStrikeUSMC, AirStrikeOpFor)
   
5. VMFA-531 could sit in the 1stMIP relays channel
   DisadvantageThey'd only be available to the 1stMIP and anyone using that channel
   DisadvantageNo TEAM distinction. It would only work if the 1stMIP was on their team.
   

Got any other ideas? I prefer the "establish set names for any pilots" #2.

[Tempus]

What happened to the old fashioned way of requesting it from the CO and having him pass that along to the airstrike team?

Is it appropriate to circumvent the CO? What if he did not want an airstrike there?

OMG, TEH CHAOS!!!!!!!!!1

[Telorn]

Last night on Kubra Dam was an excellent example of a CO directing air raids. His name was SlugSlinger, I believe. I was the SL of the Air squad. He'd constantly give us points to bomb with our fighters and defend with our helo.

[Pokerface]

The IDEAL goal is to follow the chain of command.

[StrikeFear]

Originally Posted by Tempus

What happened to the old fashioned way of requesting it from the CO and having him pass that along to the airstrike team?

Is it appropriate to circumvent the CO? What if he did not want an airstrike there?

OMG, TEH CHAOS!!!!!!!!!1

Good question. But be not so hasty to vote for some other solution. Oops. too late.

Here is your answer:
The CO doesn't really usually HAVE missions for the Jets to accomplish.
What the CO really wants is for the jets to support the squads. When he gives strike orders, he's just telling the jets where the squads need help.
If the CO is willing, this just eliminates the middle man.

There are some occasions where the CO would want specific orders that no SL would ever call in - when one of our undefended flags we own is about to be attacked and flipped, the Jets can quickly get there and possibly take out the evil oppressors before they do their dastardly deed.
In any case, a CO order should override any SL strike request.
The entire idea is subject to the COs approval.

But if you've SL'd for any length of time in a good jets squad with a good CO, you know that he is basically spending his time telling you where the troops need help. If the troops themselves could do that job, he'd have one less thing to worry about, one less thing to relay, and the job would get done more ON-TIME.

[StrikeFear]

Originally Posted by Pokerface

The IDEAL goal is to follow the chain of command.

Originally Posted by Telorn

Last night on Kubra Dam was an excellent example of a CO directing air raids. His name was SlugSlinger, I believe. I was the SL of the Air squad. He'd constantly give us points to bomb with our fighters and defend with our helo.

Guys, c'mon now. Don't get argumentative, and trash the thread while I'm trying to get help. Try to help.

This idea is not about circumventing the CO. It's about doing what the CO wants, but faster and easier on him. As my post says, he's got the final word.

And if you haven't SLd for a jet squad as much as I have (tough criteria, btw), then please just take my word for it right now that this idea does NOT cause a chain of command breakdown.

Please - help with the problem, don't argue it right now.

Man, you guys are really disappointing me. Wrecking a very positive thread due to ignorance. I'm amazed you guys voted before getting my feedback.

[Pokerface]

Originally Posted by StrikeFear

Here is your answer:
The CO doesn't really usually HAVE missions for the Jets to accomplish.
What the CO really wants is for the jets to support the squads. When he gives strike orders, he's just telling the jets where the squads need help.
If the CO is willing, this just eliminates the middle man.

If the CO doesn't have a mission for the jets to accomplish, don't be in one.
If the CO wants his jets to support the squads, he'll give the orders to do so.
If the CO is willing to give up control of one of his most important assets to his SLs, GG nub CO.

But if you've SL'd for any length of time in a good jets squad with a good CO, you know that he is basically spending his time telling you where the troops need help. If the troops themselves could do that job, he'd have one less thing to worry about, one less thing to relay, and the job would get done more ON-TIME.

If I were SL, I'd have air doing all my work for me in that instance. That's the nice part about CO; he has the whole map to keep an eye on, and at his (and only his) disposal a group that can traverse it in mere moments.

[Sabre Six]

Keeping it simple. I'm trying to remember how this worked in RL. The Brigade Commander had an air liason from the Air Force, I believe. That person did all the one on one communciation with the fast movers themselves. The commander gave the direction based on the tactical needs. Battalions could request CAS, however, it was generally part of the operational planning and set to certain decision points. Targets were preregistered for the most part. Also CAS was not a flexible as what we experience with BF2.

So squads didn't coordinate CAS, commanders did. Okay. That's an option.

Running a seperate channel that the CAS operates on in TS is an option. SLs just have to switch TS channels during close coordination.

I still think it would be cool to do. But those who have pointed out the air assets belong to the commander are absolutely correct.

[StrikeFear]

Pokerface!
Stop it! Just cut it out!
You're hijacking a thread about a TS solution (which could be useful for other things, by the way), and turning it into an argument about chain of command.

Look - even if you're right, the discussion for that argument should be in another thread!!!

This thread is asking for a specific TS solution, not asking whether you approve of the idea of SLs requesting airstrikes.

For pete's sake, man! You're an admin - move these argumentative posts to a new thread so we can talk about it there. Sheesh. Disappointed.

I'm closing this thread and starting over.