Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

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

  • Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

    The absolutely crucial factor in using tactics, from the most basic like; providing health and ammo to each other to organizing fire teams and combined infantry vehicular movements, IS COMMUNICATION.

    Therefore it is in the absolute interests of all tactical gamer players to do EVERY THING THEY CAN to allow communication between ALL players responsible for assets (Squad Leader, Crewmen, pilots, the commander and others) as SIMPLY and EASILY as humanly and with in the given computer systems as possible.

    The in game VOIP system allows for both simple and effective communication for the use of reasonably complex tactics WITH IN SQUADS and fairly basic tactics BETWEEN SQAUDS. This fact, being the single reason, for partial use of: “out of game VOIP software”. Namely, to allow:

    Reasonably complex tactics BETWEEN SQUADS
    (therefore also between infantry and vehicles)
    – this statement being noted by the “ * ” through out.

    Tactical gamer has chosen to use Teamspeak as there “out of game VOIP software”. It allows players to for fill what I stated above* and allows the enough players to do so (the number to which certain players systems prevents usage of this, affects in no way the completion of *). Therefore I ask that the use of this software and not that of another is not debated on this thread.


    However I and other Tactical Gamer players believe:


    1) The Teamspeak software features are not utilized to the extent that they MUST BE, namely not enough Project Reality channels and those channels that are being poorly organized.

    2) The extent to which Teamspeak is run by ALL Tactical Gamer players and how it used, namely not enough players run it and combined with the 1), players do not make effective use of it.


    Therefore ACTION of some form must be taken NOW! The first piece of action that must occur before anything else is: An open discussion about the perceived problem and possible solutions, and this is it.




    My exact reasons for stating problem 1) are:

    A1 – The Project Reality section with in Teamspeak, effectively only contains 1 properly named channel however the main purpose of this channel is to report any issues to admins. Each team needs a number of separate channels with easily identifiable names to allow *, therefore the present low number of channels physically prevents either team making the required communications to allow *.

    B1 – Tactical gamer contains a number of semi independent groups (e.g. 1stMIP), approximately 6 groups play Project reality and they all have their own Teamspeak Channel. However all these groups channels (namely: “In house squad channels”) are located much further down from the main project reality section, so much so many Teamspeak users do not know these channels (and possibly groups) exists and even if they do, transferring between them in game is effectively impossible. This can result in situations where there are a large number of Team Speak users on the TG TS server, all on the same team BUT with half of them being on different TS channels (specific group channels), therefore totally preventing effective communication between TS users, negating the entire point of using TS and preventing *.



    My exact reasons stating problems 2) are:

    A2 – To be able to allow *, an absolute minimum of 3 TS users per Team is required and more being a prerequisite for almost entire team effective co-ordination. At present I estimate the average number of Project Reality players on the TG TS server is between 4 and 6, this being in relation to the extreme range in number of users through out the day, namely 0 at times and 10 at others. Therefore overall the average low number of TS users prevents totally the communication between squads to allow *, in respect to the require number of TS users stated above.

    B2 – To allow *, those responsible for individual squads, namely squad leaders must communicate (following under presumption they are able to and it is now a matter of doing so) to one another. However at present players practically never state their responsibility (role) to other TS users or any tactical ideas they have. Therefore they information squad leaders or vehicle operators must provide to one another to allow * is never communicated.
    HOWEVER due to all of the reasons B2, A1, B1 it cannot be expected of players to attempt such communication really.






    So, that is what I think is the problem and those are the reasons I think they are a problem in relations to TS.

    What I think to be SOME OF THE POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS:


    A1 Solution: Create a large number of new channels under the project reality area. This precise number is dictated by the requirements to for fill * AND NOTHING ELSE.
    I am not totally sure as to how exactly for fill * but below is a my present but highly flexible idea as to what might do so:

    - Project Reality area
    - Public
    - Allied Team
    - Squad A
    - Squad B
    - Squad C
    - Squad D
    - Tank
    - Air
    - CO
    - Other Team
    - Squad A
    - Squad B
    - Squad C
    - Squad D
    - Tank
    - Air
    - CO
    -In house squads
    - Group 1 (e.g. 1stMIP)
    - Group 2
    - Group 3
    - Group 4
    - Group 5

    As i said, this is just an example. So from all of you, i would love to hear you ideas. The above i quite complex, but you dont have to use all the channels BUT it clearly shows which players responsible for which assets. HOWEVER as more players use TS the simplicity and ease at which communication between many different assets will be wondefully apparent.


    B1 Solution: Create a 2nd almost identical Channel for all semi independent squads that play PR under the Project Reality area. This would allow all Project Reality TS users to easily view what independent group players are on there team and allow them to communicate many many times more easily, in part because of the ease at which they can switch to their channels due to the closeness other it to other relevant team channels.
    This is clearly show in the Channel idea diagram shown above, with Groups channels for groups that play PR.


    A2 Solution and B2 Solution: These are intrinsically linked because they are both essentially human issues, thus require a very human solution, directly contrasting in many respects with the software changes, to put it poorly (lol).
    Firstly, ALL REGULAR Tactical Gamer Server players, forum members or not must have reasons for using Team Speak, the information on how to set it up and most importantly information on how to effectively take advantage of huge opportunity it provides for allowing *.
    To do this i suggest the creation of a single sticked thread, with the single aim of providing the above (TS info ext.). This will remove the element of confusion and lack of understanding of Team Speak on the part of a huge of players - i thoroughly doubt every single person reading knows how to use TS and in-game tactics to allow *. I know threads already exist, but Team Speak must take up a greater importance in the minds of players and one crucial way to represent this importance, is through its importance on the TG PR FORUM.
    While in-game, TG players on TS must encourage other good players who activley take on responsiblity (Squad leader, tank driving ext.) and put effort in to any kind of tactics to consider TS, and/or just tell them to check the stikied forum thread. NO need for in-game explanations IF other players put the time and effort in before hand into organizing and producing the TS thread, getting other on TS for all of you will become mearly the giving of a webaddress (TS forum - PR - TS stiky).



    There are many players out there who dont use TS and/or dont understand it BUT there are just as many players who use TS and understand how to use it amazingly well. [B]It is up to those who do understand it to EXPLAIN TO THOSE WHO DONT and TO DEVELOP THE TS SYSTEMS THAT ARE ALL READY INPLACE to create:
    A game whos tactical experience remains truely unrivaled and never forgotten





    You all have your opinions on TS, ideas, problems, issues, comments, all the above is up for debate, lets hear it, LETS TEAR THIS ENTIRE TEAM SPEAK ISSUE APART - the good, the bad and the ugly, EVERYTHING
    Last edited by Top Cat AJA; 06-17-2007, 06:05 PM.

    TG-E1st TacticalGamer European Division |

  • #2
    Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

    Problem: I and many, many others cannot use Teamspeak whilst playing any sort of Battlefield 2 modification.
    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~
    I have a tendency to key out three or four things and then let them battle for supremacy while I key, so there's a lot of backspacing as potential statements are slaughtered and eaten by the victors. ~
    Feel free to quote me. ~

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

      You've got a lot of good ideas, and a lot of guys who I respect have told you so. And I think I can appreciate what you're trying to do. Kind of. But you have a lot of rethinking to do, I suspect.

      Your first huge hurdle:
      In this whole post of yours you never even acknowledge that some guys don't have computers that are even capable of running the programs simultaneously. This has been brought up to you before, yet you still seem to be ignoring it.
      Now you push it further by using terms like "all TG gamers" and "MUST DO" and "required" concerning players running TS alongside the game itself. The only implication possible, of course, is that if a guy doesn't have a machine that can run this stuff, too bad for him.
      I happen to find that completely offensive. My guess is that many others will completely tune you out on this basis alone, and that doesn't even deal with the issue of convincing (or "requiring") guys to change the way they have historically played the game.

      I know you aren't trying to offend anyone, but don't tell me that I must run TS 'cause I like to squad-lead once in a while on PR. The far better way is to do what you did in your other post, which was to invite people to try your system. That invitation convinced me to try your way sometime. If your way convinces me, I'll convince others. Just don't exclude people by definition, OK?

      I see Ednos is already lining up the cannons, lol.
      OPS, the bacon is on you.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

        I'm lining up no cannons. He got +rep for the good idea.
        The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~
        I have a tendency to key out three or four things and then let them battle for supremacy while I key, so there's a lot of backspacing as potential statements are slaughtered and eaten by the victors. ~
        Feel free to quote me. ~

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

          That's not quite what I meant. I meant that you made my point before I did, that's all.
          OPS, the bacon is on you.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

            Originally posted by Top Cat AJA View Post



            It allows players to for fill what I stated above* and allows the enough players to do so (the number to which certain players systems prevents usage of this, affects in no way the completion of *).

            Cough Cough.

            I know atleast half of you cannot use Team Speak and it does not matter in the slightest.

            The reasons is becuase you do not need 32 players on each team on teamspeak, you need 12 max to allow total ALL SQUAD communication and co-ordination.


            The fact that a large number cannot run TS is totaly relavent to the goal of increasing TS usage becuase one MUST ACHNOLAGE the reasons why people do not use TS. However, i and the thread does achnolage this and WE MUST MOVE ON - I will not let this thread get bogged down with such.

            However Developement of teamspeak is not really connected atall with the issue becuase it only conserns those who can and will use the systme.

            TG-E1st TacticalGamer European Division |

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

              I don't use TS while playing for another set of reasons even though I am capable..

              -I don't like hearing extra background chatter while I am trying to search for sound cues for the enemy's approach.

              -I dislike the sound quality of TS in general. There are underlying reasons as to why people choose TS over another VOIP program, and I understand that. The low sound quality of TS bothers me, so as it is not a mandatory factor of playing here, I personally skip it whenever possible.

              -The coordination you speak of should be handled by the CO or the in-game systems. I don't need to be in TS with you to see you using the in-game system to request ammo or a medic. If I can make it, I will, if I can't I wont no matter what squad you are in. Using the in-game method of requesting something also has the added benefit of seeing if anyone who can do the thing you need is even near you. If I request a medic and don't see one close to me, I accept I wont be getting meds and move on instead of dwell over it. The CO is supposed to be the guy doing inter-squad coordination, isn't he?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

                Originally posted by Top Cat AJA View Post
                Cough Cough.

                I know atleast half of you cannot use Team Speak and it does not matter in the slightest.

                The reasons is becuase you do not need 32 players on each team on teamspeak, you need 12 max to allow total ALL SQUAD communication and co-ordination.


                The fact that a large number cannot run TS is totaly relavent to the goal of increasing TS usage becuase one MUST ACHNOLAGE the reasons why people do not use TS. However, i and the thread does achnolage this and WE MUST MOVE ON - I will not let this thread get bogged down with such.

                However Developement of teamspeak is not really connected atall with the issue becuase it only conserns those who can and will use the systme.
                I had a lot of trouble deciphering this, but here's what I think you're saying:
                • It doesn't matter that many of us can't use TS.
                • It doesn't matter BECAUSE you only need effectively one member in each squad to take on the communication duties.
                • You do not intend to allow the thread to be bogged down by major and important details that strongly affect the content of your suggestion.


                What happens when you have a squad full of non-TS-enabled players? You can't ensure that each squad gets one capable member. Also, what do you do about people who just joined the server without knowing anything at all about Tactical Gamer or its Teamspeak server?

                If it's only relevant to those who CAN use the system, why do you say that ALL Tactical Gamer members MUST be made more aware of this system that perhaps even the majority cannot use? Your minor detail has turned into a major problem.

                Have you forgotten that the CO is in place to organize the squads? If you think it's a mess, step up to the plate and try to fix it in-game.
                The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~
                I have a tendency to key out three or four things and then let them battle for supremacy while I key, so there's a lot of backspacing as potential statements are slaughtered and eaten by the victors. ~
                Feel free to quote me. ~

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

                  That was an amazingly well written post, are you a politician or a lawyer?

                  I think many players find TS causes unnecessary lag, and extra unwanted background noise. Personally, I can't understand half of you guys and your crazy accents!

                  Unfortunately, too many players in game choose not to talk. Not very realistic, and it hurts the team. I can only assume this is because they either:
                  A1. Do not have a mic
                  B1. Do not have a mouth
                  C1. Sound like creepy pedophiles when they talk.
                  |TG-X|WAREHOUSE

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

                    Originally posted by w.WAREHOUSE View Post
                    That was an amazingly well written post, are you a politician or a lawyer?

                    I think many players find TS causes unnecessary lag, and extra unwanted background noise. Personally, I can't understand half of you guys and your crazy accents!

                    Unfortunately, too many players in game choose not to talk. Not very realistic, and it hurts the team. I can only assume this is because they either:
                    A1. Do not have a mic
                    B1. Do not have a mouth
                    C1. Sound like creepy pedophiles when they talk.
                    Since when were politicians good at writing?

                    GW can hardly talk not to mind write
                    Gerardnm

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

                      First off, I run TS and TSO and sit in the TG TS PRM channel everytime I play on the TG PRM servers so that I can access an Admin and hear when the PW is going up etc.

                      The BF2/PRM VoIP works very well in my opinion as I can communicateswith both my SL and Squadmates and the CO when I end up SLing myself.

                      When I'm an SM, I keep my comms to a minimum by just calling contact reports, Acking SL orders and letting wounded SMs know I'm on the way if I'm playing Medic. The SL has enough to do running the squad and keeping the CO happy without my flapping my gums all the time.

                      Unless you run TSO with TS, you don't get the speaker tag showing you who's talking on channel. This isn't a real big problem if you're in a dedicated squad channel, but I do like to know who I'm being spoken to by.

                      When I run TSO and TS, it often screw up the speaker tags with the BF2 VoIP, but at least I know it can only be the CO, my SL or the other SMs.

                      I can't speak for others, but I find the keybinding necesssary to change TS channels in-game don't work apart from the +/- I have bound to the TS volume. Could just be my computer fu being weak...

                      I can see how having an SL channel for both teams would be a boon when either side doesn't have a CO, but inter squad comms can be managed via the team text for co-ordiniating transport etc.


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

                        Originally posted by Terminal Boy View Post

                        I can't speak for others, but I find the keybinding necesssary to change TS channels in-game don't work apart from the +/- I have bound to the TS volume. Could just be my computer fu being weak...
                        Not to go off-topic, but it is most likely not your computer, it's just a quirk with Teamspeak. Where most people run in to diffuculties switching channels is going from a sub-channel under one parent to another sub-channel in a different parent channel. Example (not exact channels but should work universally):

                        -Battlefield 2
                        ---Project Reality
                        ---POE2
                        -In-House Squads
                        ---1st
                        ---2nd

                        In the example above "BF2" and "In-House" are parent channels and "PR", "POE2", "1st", and "2nd" are sub-channels.

                        If I am in the Project Reality sub-channel of the BF2 Parent Channel, using key-binds, I cannot go to the 1st in-house squad sub-channel directly because it is in a different Parent Channel (In-House Squads). Teamspeak doesn't allow this for some reason. You have to switch to a parent channel before switching to a sub-channel beneath it. The way to get around this is to also set key-binds for the parent channels.

                        I use the num-pad for channel key binds, so, let's say I have the BF2 Parent channel set to ctrl+num7 and the Project Reality under it set to ctrl+num4 (4 is directly under 7 on the keypad). I have the in-house squads parent set to ctrl+num8 and the 1st subchannel as ctrl+num5. So, now to easily switch from the PR channel to the 1st squad channel I simply type:

                        Ctrl+num8 (wait to hear "switched channel")
                        Ctrl+num5 (confirmed when I hear "switched channel")

                        To go back to the PR channel:

                        ctrl+num7
                        ctrl+num4

                        Using this system I have three parent channels designated (num7, num8, num9) and two sub-channels under each (7-->4,1, 8-->5,2, 9-->6,3)

                        I hope this might make switching channels easier!
                        LoyalGuard

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

                          That makes a lot of sense and I'll try that later! Many thanks!


                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

                            First off, great post Top Cat. I see some channels have sub-channels for teams, why can't Project Reality have one. Also, we need to take into account that half the time there is no commander, so we have no way to talk between SLs. I take the time and have to type out things over team chat to tell other squad's things. Sure, I'm in favor of the new channels in TS for those who do use TS. I know personally sometimes the 1stMIP will make two squads and keep close contact with each other through TS. It works great and even sometimes when I fly they can request pick-ups and talk to me through TS. I believe the channels would be great asset, it's not like they can hurt anything.
                            |TG|XCliPsX
                            Medic, Engineer, Squad Leader, Commander





                            Quote from the Tactical Gamer Primer:
                            Within Tactical Gamer, ANY activity that capitalizes on the limitations of a game to provide the advantage rather than that advantage coming from superior teamwork, strategy and tactics, is frowned upon. We all want to win when we play, but the focus at Tactical Gamer should be one of winning with some sort of dignity, honor, and skill, not because you were able to out-exploit the other team or box them into a corner built on technological weakness that gives you the advantage.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Teamspeak Development and Usage Growth.

                              Originally posted by XCliPsX View Post
                              A game whos tactical experience remains truely unrivaled and never forgotten

                              na m8, wrong game. ArmA is ultimate in tactics ;). i see what you mean though.

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X