Comm Traffic/Covering

[Shafik]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

Sticky, you're saying people should join the channel and shut up till they're addressed? You seriously think that's possible? How does a new comer join the game? Who does he talk to and where? And I think the picture you posted is to this thread what radio chatter is to TS.

[SloppyJoe]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

I think Doc's ideas encompass more than just 'chatter control', of course that is a big part of it. But I guess the other stuff was easily missed.

Thanks for the 'nuff said and the pretty picture though Sticky, move along.

[Sleepdoc]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

Your signature is suddenly very relevant Sloppy....

"The success of what we do depends upon people valuing the team over themselves."
- Wulfyn

[Riyker]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

My concern still holds.

During games where this is no RO, the SL currently "hears" too much traffic. Turning off the CA means he'll have to do it temporarily or he want get incoming trans from the CO.

I was trying to adopt what SleepDoc proposed with one couching it for those times when a RO isn't available.

** I've been using CA acronym to represent Channel Commander role. I should have used CC to be more clear. CO still represents Commanding Officer and RO for Radio Operator **

How about this:

1) CO always resides in the root Arma channel.
2) Players must always join a sub-channel (new players enter the root and are assigned out into individual squad channels).
3) CO communicates to squad CHANNELs using Whisper to Channel -> Channel Name (for each squad).
4) SLs communicates back to CO using Channel PreDefs -> Parent Channel.
5) SLs use their existing CC bind for SL<->SL broadcast communications when nesc.

This is the best scenario, and has a bonus benefit. Since the goal here is to reduce SL traffic (w/o an RO) or a squad's RO's traffic, having the CO reply via the whisper to the SL channel ALL element members will here the CO and "auto" clear comms. In effect this helps further to reduce covering.

* If I adopt (w/o permission) some of SleepDocs graphics we have:

[peardog]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

So why hasn't this system been implemented yet?

Refer to Diagram #1 - #3 ...

[boudreux]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

On Friday night, when a group of 10-15 of us were playing Payback, here was our system for new people.

PL noticed them joining, communicated through text, and assigned them a squad and SL contact.

I felt that it worked perfect for that situation, because the PL is away from the action, knows the big picture, and can keep this chatter out of the SL's ears.

[Sleepdoc]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

@peardog

I guess I'm going to put my response on hold to your comment unless you bother to explain it. it is too cryptic for my simple mind to decode....:)

@Riyker

Is it fair to assume by CO, you mean the same thing as the platoon commander?

I started asking a bunch of things. But before i Do, i would like ot ask that Shafik and Sloppy look at your image.

Guys? Can his system work under the current limitations that we have discovered in Teamspeak whisper system? Does his approach allow for a single, prebuilt teamspeak bind set that does not require any personalization?

Im intrigued by your design Riyker. I am looking at it critically. My shortcoming is that I always need to help of a teamspeak binding expert at my side to determine if the apporach will create problems.

As I learned the hard way in my first many hours on this problem .... just becuase i can draw a better flow doesn't mean that teamspeak can do it and it doesnt mean that it will be perceived as a simple teamspeak approach if implemented.

I will continue to look at your design and I would like to hear from Shafik and Sloppy on the issues I mentioned. I promise to comment more son, once i get my technical feedback..

[Sleepdoc]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

On Friday night, when a group of 10-15 of us were playing Payback, here was our system for new people.

PL noticed them joining, communicated through text, and assigned them a squad and SL contact.

I felt that it worked perfect for that situation, because the PL is away from the action, knows the big picture, and can keep this chatter out of the SL's ears.

The design we are working on is for EVO. Not a controlled coop mission. This is a vital distinction, as EVO is where new guys arrive all the time and platoon commanders are hard to come by....... I'm sorry that this was not clear. You have made me realize we need to amek this clear in our process going on here....

It is our hope to create a system , FOR TG EVO ONLY, that is ...

A. Nearly as easy to use as our current bindings approach

B. does not require a platoon commander (or commanding officer as Riyker calls him), because they are rare to come by in nightly EVO

C. Uses a single key bind system that requires no individual customization. Just download, get familiar and go.

D. Reduces squad level chatter by isolating it whenever possible and appropriate. Furthermore, reduces Commander channel chatter as well. But Squad level comes first. CC second.

E. Can actually be done in TS. (and accepts teamspeaks limitations)

F. MOST IMPORTANT--> The Leadership of TG will agree, get on board, and update the SOP and downloads to give it a mandate. That won't happen unless the other things are met at a minimum.... we are just members and guests. without their buy in, nothing will happen. We are in the process of getting the presentation and udnerstanding sooo clear, that it is a slam dunk sale. we are not there yet.

[WhiskeySix]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

1) CO always resides in the root Arma channel.
2) Players must always join a sub-channel (new players enter the root and are assigned out into individual squad channels).
3) CO communicates to squad CHANNELs using Whisper to Channel -> Channel Name (for each squad).
4) SLs communicates back to CO using Channel PreDefs -> Parent Channel.
5) SLs use their existing CC bind for SL<->SL broadcast communications when nesc.

I think this is brilliant ^^ :icon14:

[Sleepdoc]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

I think this is brilliant ^^ :icon14:

Yep. It was my first impression too.

So i need to make sure using my teamspeak experts, shafik and Sloppy, that it can actualy be bound in the bindings section easily as per the requirements...

[ANGELofDEATH]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

1) CO always resides in the root Arma channel.
2) Players must always join a sub-channel (new players enter the root and are assigned out into individual squad channels).
3) CO communicates to squad CHANNELs using Whisper to Channel -> Channel Name (for each squad).
4) SLs communicates back to CO using Channel PreDefs -> Parent Channel.
5) SLs use their existing CC bind for SL<->SL broadcast communications when nesc.

I think this is brilliant ^^ :icon14:

I agree.

As a user and SA of TS for years , multiply whisper keybinds are common.

This can all easily be done with whispers... You must remember to not bind anything to whisper "to all" (as it goes to everyone in TS) :) sleep lol

You can easily set up a list of "Whisper to" each squad, but everyone in the squad channel will hear it not just the SL/CC/CA/RO.

You can set up "whisper to" any one person in TS (they have to be in TS when you set the bind).. Although changing thier names to "Sam HoySL1" will void the binds if they change it after you have set it to "Sam Hoy"..

The list can be made to shadow the "switch to"... ALT+1 switch to squad one channel... CTRL+1 whisper to squad one.. and so on.
Everything else is basically there.. only thing that needs changing in TS itself is changing the parent channel name to something that will get the new guys in there.. remember it cant be too long... "ArmA Evo JOIN here" sounds good to me.

[Shafik]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

You can set up "whisper to" any one person in TS (they have to be in TS when you set the bind).. Although changing thier names to "Sam HoySL1" will void the binds if they change it after you have set it to "Sam Hoy"..

After little setting up, you can do this on the fly, in game. There is an option in TS to quickly bind a key to whisper to the last person who whispered. When you hear someone whisper, someone you'd like a direct whisper to, you hit a key (mine is shift+num1) which assigns that whisperer to slot 1 (there are 10 slots available) and then another key (mine is num1) to whisper to him ONLY. If all SL's do this they can talk to each other directly, individually. Tested.

[Sleepdoc]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

I agree.

As a user and SA of TS for years , multiply whisper keybinds are common.

This can all easily be done with whispers... You must remember to not bind anything to whisper "to all" (as it goes to everyone in TS) :) sleep lol

You can easily set up a list of "Whisper to" each squad, but everyone in the squad channel will hear it not just the SL/CC/CA/RO.

You can set up "whisper to" any one person in TS (they have to be in TS when you set the bind).. Although changing thier names to "Sam HoySL1" will void the binds if they change it after you have set it to "Sam Hoy"..

The list can be made to shadow the "switch to"... ALT+1 switch to squad one channel... CTRL+1 whisper to squad one.. and so on.
Everything else is basically there.. only thing that needs changing in TS itself is changing the parent channel name to something that will get the new guys in there.. remember it cant be too long... "ArmA Evo JOIN here" sounds good to me.

The Whisper here and there approach, although certainly doable, has been tested by some admins (and others) and determined to be "too complicated' as a TG EVO wide solution. At least, this was what I heard in an early meeting we had on the issue a few weeks back. It was seen again today in further tests with other people.

I share this "Keep it simple" sentiment. TG EVO is a place for a wide level of users. Getting new users to "Whisper" (and not even to people but to whole squads) and then "press a set of keys to establish whisper back", IMHO, is unlikely to be accepted by leadership for the reasons stated above.

And finally, the idea that each time we come into EVO, people will have to update their binds to react to specifc names ,is also likely out of the question, as I understood it from the leadership. And i would agree.

I think we are losing touch with the objectives of this effort toward a change in TG EVO comms....

My understanding is the only change they (the leadership) would seriously consider was one that was met the following requirements...

1. Did not add undue complexity

2. did not require any specialty TS knowledge. Just download a single keybind file and go.

3. reduced chatter at the SL level.

4. was easy to explain to new guys, just like what we have now is pretty easy.

The whisper keybind approach does not meet those requirements. It is advanced user stuff and probably not suitable for new guys in an open EVO environment like TG's.

Now in a controlled coop server with advanced users across the board, anything is possible.

The solution we are looking for must be easily used by a wide level of users in TG EVO --->>>--->>> AND--->>> The leadership of TG must approve it.

This discussion has lost its track .... again......

[SloppyJoe]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

This discussion has lost its track .... again......

Heh, no worries. It's easy to get side tracked at this stage. Welcome all ideas, certainly, but at some point the ideas need to coalesce into something packaged, presentable, and understandable. Hence, the next step, but sure, keep the ideas coming and the questions/concerns. Maybe some other ideas will coalesce into a tangable package.

[stickyjeans69]

Re: Comm Traffic/Covering

One major problem i see posed in comms, is the lack of something like the Direct communication feature that is in ArmA's broken VOIP. if that were fixed it wouldmake things alot easier. however due to Evo being so dynamic with people moving about in their ways. the comms will probably stay very very Clostrophobic if you try and play them tactically. If things where slowed WAY down, and Everyone stopped, and grouped up before attacking, then only the squad leaders talked, figured out how they where going to approach. then executed, there would not be much need for more talk between the Squad leaders, and communication Inside the squad would be much more simple for the SL's. Moving in this style at this point would take work and complete cooperation from everybody....