I remember that I ordered weapons free for Alpha team after Variable opened up with the sniper rifle and shortly after that Grip ordered open fire on command net.
The setup for the attack on 2nd objective took too long for my taste.
There was lot more traffic in command net (6 channel commanders after all) this time and I couldn't follow everything because team internal comms often were overlapping the command net but the really important stuff concerning my team always got through to me.
Radio discipline is very important even more with a high number of 6 channel commanders. Starting conversations worked well ("Command this is Alpha" etc.) but we can still can work on reducing the time we need to carry out conversations on command net and concluding them. Think before you use the radio (channel commander) and then keep it simple stupid.
It was a fun mission again, thanks to all participants. I'm looking forward to the next one, maybe with a completely new platoon leader?Â
(12-16-2009, 09:14 PM)Zwobot link Wrote: [ -> ]Radio discipline is very important even more with a high number of 6 channel commanders. Starting conversations worked well ("Command this is Alpha" etc.) but we can still can work on reducing the time we need to carry out conversations on command net and concluding them. Think before you use the radio (channel commander) and then keep it simple stupid.
I believe we can improve the "Starting conversation phase": We don't need all the wording "Commad this is Alpha" etc.... Simply call the addressed unit and call out your nickname\squad name and wait for response.. It will be something like that: Command-Alpha and then command will respond: Alpha-Command. That's it. You would be amazed of how it renders comm curtesy much more effectively. Try avoiding too much ahhh ohhh and oooos before and during your transmission.
One more note. During mission progress you will find it useless to mention even your name, since your voicer will be recognized by all transmitting units.
Yeah, I'll try to be less verbose in my comms. A lot of what I've been doing is 'force-of-habit' from paintball comms - we had a manual and required class before being issued walkie-talkies. . .
That said, I wish you all could have heard Viking on our squad comms - cool stuff!
(12-17-2009, 11:01 AM)Variable link Wrote: [ -> ]I believe we can improve the "Starting conversation phase": We don't need all the wording "Commad this is Alpha" etc.... Simply call the addressed unit and call out your nickname\squad name and wait for response.. It will be something like that: Command-Alpha and then command will respond: Alpha-Command. That's it. You would be amazed of how it renders comm curtesy much more effectively. Try avoiding too much ahhh ohhh and oooos before and during your transmission.
One more note. During mission progress you will find it useless to mention even your name, since your voicer will be recognized by all transmitting units.
I don't want to force anyone to use either callsigns or names "on the radio" but I disagree with not using anything. Yes, most voices are familiar but I don't want to get into a bad habit and also it is more immersive for me to use a "Varaiable from Zwobot ... ... Zwobot Out." format for channel commander traffic.
I totally agree with the ahhh ohhh and oooos during transmissions. That's exactly what I meant should be improved and I don't exclude myself thereÂ
(12-17-2009, 11:01 AM)Variable link Wrote: [ -> ]It will be something like that: Command-Alpha and then command will respond: Alpha-Command. That's it. You would be amazed of how it renders comm curtesy much more effectively. Try avoiding too much ahhh ohhh and oooos before and during your transmission.
No wonder they use this format in RL too since it's more effective and keep the radio free for all useless chatter
(12-17-2009, 07:16 PM)Zwobot link Wrote: [ -> ]I don't want to force anyone to use either callsigns or names "on the radio" but I disagree with not using anything. Yes, most voices are familiar but I don't want to get into a bad habit and also it is more immersive for me to use a "Varaiable from Zwobot ... ... Zwobot Out." format for channel commander traffic.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough, but I never meant not to use anything. Calling out for the addressed unit (either by its nick or by its squad name or command position) should be a must before attempting to transmit. I just say that it's better to ommit, if we take your exapmle, the "from", so you will only have "Variable, Zwobot". Or- "Alpha, Command" if we play as a platoon. That's how it's done in my RL experience. It cuts down a lot of comms traffic.
Ah I see and of course I agree that it is a must to start a transmission by calling out the adressed unit and your own name/callsign and then wait for a response from the adressed unit.
But I prefer the "from" format because it sounds more clear to me but I don't want to insist on this single wordÂ
In addition it would be useful to signal end of a transmission by calling out the name/callsign and "Out" (to end the conversation) or "Over" (if you have asked a question and await a respnse from the other unit).
We so need that "radio filter" for TS...if it wasn't added after it was recorded, but it sounds awesome when the squad leader is talking. I must also say that compared to them most players on CiA server lack passion.
In case you agree on a few basic rules, you should post them in an extra thread.
I for one would vote for Alpha/Command/... rather than nicks, this way it's always the same callsign even if the squad leaders change.
(12-18-2009, 03:15 PM)Hawke link Wrote: [ -> ]... I must also say that compared to them most players on CiA server lack passion.
I disagree.
lack passion of what & in what?
in speedy shooting and fast got killed so stupid?.
playing on WGL (most real mod) with noob server mode on? with all those crosshire/huds/cursors active?
i think this is none of sense and no passion of real fight..
For my point of view they also attacked that hill too fast, in full speed , quite rushy and messy like in some shooter game
it was wrong and they have been deafated!
I noticed there quite amateur and not real style of play which is good maybe in COD or OFP2 games but not in OFP on WGL!
they also talk on TS nice but this is almost nothing to do what they are doing on this battlefield!
was there any moment at all when leader gave direct promision to shoot to anyone in squads????
lol what i can see in first movie is quite funny
mission: running dogs are attacking some hill too fast, without any respect for virtual enemy and they are surprised that those "targets" are  defending this position good!
so they are dieing in full surprise and asking themself how so stupid AI is possible to take down so smart humans! Â lol! how AI even dares to shot us all Â
I agree that radio transmission should be brief and to the point, for example "Alpha actual/viking4" then wait for reply, the actual designates the sqd leader or commander rather than just any member of the unit, I was using my name and number in the sqd that way if the leader needs to give me a waypoint connected to the conversation then he wont have to think about what it is or worse have to ask me thus using another transmission. If for example the plt commander calls after the alpha sqd leader has been killed and he does not know who has taken command of alpha he can simply say "alpha/command (or what ever his designation is)," the response would be "command/alpha actual viking", this would tell him that the sqd leader is dead and that viking has taken command of alpha sqd. I admit I will use"this is" in there sometimes by force of habit because in RL we often used it even though it wasnt required. when the sqd leader is calling a sqd member he can simply say "viking/actual" move up 10 meters (or whatever), reply "actual/viking4" roger. short and to the point anyway it is one way of doing it.
While I understand and share your sentiment regarding the comment, mikka, I don't think it's helpful to critique a critique of "most players on CiA server" by insulting the play and players of another squad, particularly when they have not played any direct part in the insult leveled at players here.
edit: Thanks for the explanation, Viking - I had been wondering about the "actual" part of the comms. The number designation coupled with your name is a great idea. What's the usage for "How copy?"
you use "how copy" to make sure that the last transmission was clear it requires the reciever to repeat the message the usual reply is " I copy" if the message was recieved and understood, and then a restatement of the message as well as in I copy move to such and such. an example would sound like this: Viking/actual engage target on my command how copy? actual/viking I copy engaging target on your command out.
I dont understand the actual? Guess its my lacking english skills coming in to play. So could you explaine it the Actual fore dummies way Viking?