Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

In-game voice comms are bad, replace with teamspeak

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • In-game voice comms are bad, replace with teamspeak

    I highly recommend we replace in-game communications with teamspeak. There are frequent issues with in-game communications that slow us down or render us unable to operate during gameplay. I think the TG teamspeak is underutilized. We can achieve the same level of communication (and more) using teamspeak's channel commanders and appropriate permanent channels for each squads. We'd need updated permissions to use channel commander, current registered users cannot use it.

    Setup of channel commander takes one minute (this video is a bit loud and distorted so turn your volume down before you click play), here is an example setup:

    You can find other examples on youtube.

    During operations where we invite players outside the outfit to join the platoon, only the squad leader would need to repeat orders for them.

    P.S. We can make a better setup video later if we agree to move to temspeak.

  • #2
    Re: In-game voice comms are bad, replace with teamspeak

    I highly advise that everyone get on teamspeak as a backup, and encourage others to do so, but we use the in-game comms for a reason! We run open squads often and not using those comms--or having to double up on them!--just isn't going to work!

    Using the in-game comms means our habits and SOPs are compatible with the community at large.



    Comment


    • #3
      Re: In-game voice comms are bad, replace with teamspeak

      Jan, I understand that in game comms can be buggy, we have all had to reset them once or twice, but they work 90% of the time in my book.
      I agree with starstriker for these reasons:

      Bad for Recruitment:
      Our teamspeak requires registration on our forums. This creates a huge barrier to entry for anyone who wants to join our squads. That is a Tacticalgamer.com wide policy that is not going to change. Therefore we would be asking anyone who wants to play with us to fill out a form on our website. Most people will not do it.
      In addition part of what draws new players to TG is hearing the communication and coordination of our squads and platoons. As a recruiting tool I think we want the non TG guys to hear all our communications.

      Creates need to technical support by veteran TG players
      Even if the other players are willing to register and get on our TS do it, many would require help. In ArmA II when I was playing ACE/ACRE mods, teaspeak was required. What it meant was that we were constantly doing technical support for new players as they joined the server; helping them to get registered and to link their teamspeak to their forum account. We would have to pull a veteran TG player out of the game for 5-10 minutes to help every new player. It ended up being a lot of work.

      Bad for squad leading:
      Squad leaders have enough things to think about and say without repeating their orders twice, once for TG members and once for nonTG members. That takes thought and time that squad leaders do not always have. Also, some commands require immediate action (we are going to max crash / breach the door / cross the open terrain in 3, 2, 1... GO GO GO) and repeating these commands would be ineffective.
      The question foremost in my mind is "what will bring the most tactical fun to the server?"

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: In-game voice comms are bad, replace with teamspeak

        I second Jan.

        As he said at the end of his post, that would be perfect for the communication flow between SLs and PL. SLs would still have to repeat PL orders to their squad.
        Internal squad comms would continue to use the IG system, and leaders may mute Plat comms. (so no more blueberries spamming it). I see no drawback to this.

        edit: Garthra posted while I was typing. I'm giving my opinion on your post from my previous comments: TS used as a link between SLs and PL only.

        Point 3 is quite valid, but as a matter of fact, I quite rarely witness it. MAX pulls are subject to the "asset pull" rule so SL should - and usually will - ask for them to be spawned. I even get often distracted by PL commands when flying a Gal, trying to cope with PL's directives instead of SL's. You can't recommand SMs to mute plat comms if you expect them to hear global, quick to execute "immediate actions".

        Point 2 is mostly invalid as long as we're talking about SL/PL officers/NCOs.

        I disagree with point 1 though. I do agree, specifically, that platoon comms are great to listen to but:
        1) they distract from squad comms
        2) blueberries often invade plat comms
        3) an extra step is required for every SL/SM when a platoon runs: adjusting Plat comms volume
        4) is it a better option to let 36 people wait in Indar's WG, useless and bored in idle [TG]Galaxies, while one of the last nearby base is falling (and it fell indeed) to a 1-12 enemy force in the last 40mns of an alert because PL has to relog due to comms issues ?
        Last edited by Cairbre; 10-05-2015, 02:04 PM.

        Ba-dum-tss
        My life before TG http://stats.dasanfall.com/ps2/player/Cairbre
        Who cares about stats ? http://stats.dasanfall.com/ps2/player/Cairbr

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: In-game voice comms are bad, replace with teamspeak

          Originally posted by starstriker1 View Post
          I highly advise that everyone get on teamspeak as a backup, and encourage others to do so, but we use the in-game comms for a reason! We run open squads often and not using those comms--or having to double up on them!--just isn't going to work!

          Using the in-game comms means our habits and SOPs are compatible with the community at large.
          ^^This^^

          We have been over this topic several times before when the in game comms system, in the past, would get buggy. We settled on encouraging SLs and PLs to be in TS as a back up only. None of the arguments for or against have changed so I see no reason to switch from the 'SL/PL in TS as back up system' folks should be using now.




          * *

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: In-game voice comms are bad, replace with teamspeak

            In my TR playtimes, I was actively avoiding TS-only squads, but it turned out to be impossible. However, it is extremely negative to recruitment at large.
            MacKahan -- Mac-Kay-an In case you were curious. ;-)

            sigpic

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: In-game voice comms are bad, replace with teamspeak

              There's a disadvantage to running sl-pl communications in company command on TS instead of in-game: the higher level communication is not heard by the rest of the platoon. Leaving aside the obvious recruitment angle of seeing our excellent platoon level comms in action, there's a substantial morale drop for squad members in not hearing their leaders deliberating and communicating.

              Back even before I joined the outfit and was still nominally running 102 tags, I joined a TG squad run by Randy and we coordinated over a custom in-game channel instead of platoon... cutting the non SLs (who we figured didn't need to hear that stuff) out of the loop. The result was the SMs didn't think we had a plan, didn't think larger operations and coordination were happening, and weren't seeing the communication example being set by their leaders. Morale took a hit, and in-squad coordination and teamwork suffered.

              An important lesson about leadership that I've learned over the years is that it's not enough to do things correctly, you need to be SEEN doing things correctly. Invisible competence isn't leadership!



              Comment


              • #8
                Re: In-game voice comms are bad, replace with teamspeak

                TS is not an adequate replacement (unfortunately) for all the reasons noted above. And we have tried to do so in the past -- the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

                All-in-all, I find the PS2 in-game comms to be 5x5 and efficient 99.9% of the time.
                sigpic

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: In-game voice comms are bad, replace with teamspeak

                  Originally posted by starstriker1 View Post
                  An important lesson about leadership that I've learned over the years is that it's not enough to do things correctly, you need to be SEEN doing things correctly. Invisible competence isn't leadership!
                  Now there is a quote for a signature! Well said indeed.
                  |TG-189th| Unkl
                  ArmA 3 Game Officer
                  Dean of Tactical Gamer University
                  189th Infantry Brigade Member
                  SUBMIT A RIBBON NOMINATION OR CONTACT AN ARMA ADMIN
                  "We quickly advance in the opposite direction and take cover in a house on the SW side of town." - BadStache

                  Comment

                  Connect

                  Collapse

                  TeamSpeak 3 Server

                  Collapse

                  Advertisement

                  Collapse

                  Twitter Feed

                  Collapse

                  Working...
                  X