Radio communications

[Panzer Jaeger 0]

Hi again!

Started playing OpF once again. Why I ever stopped, don't ask...

But one thing has bothered me. Radio communications during battle. I haven't played OpF online (yet...), so I can't comment on that.

It must be "software-technical" thing, but why does squadleaders give their orders to their squad (either Ai or player) via radio? This has very bad habit of jamming possible commands that are to be given.

There should be an override for squadleader to "shout out" his (or her) orders.

Take tank crews for example. Situations change very quickly and that little 5 secs might be crucial to tell your gunner to "T-80, 50m, fire the f****ing gun!!!!" During this time co is having a nice afternoon chat with platoon leader, who has already flown into orbit with his turret...

Sorry about harsh language...

[FSPilot 0]

I know what you mean.

Especially in the tanks. I'm muzzle to muzzle with a T-80, I give the command to target it...

"Target T-80, 05 1"

My character has to say all of that before the gunner even starts to rotate the turret. Then I click to fire...

"Move to, 05 1"

NO! My mouse wasn't in the right position.

1-1

"Keep formation"

"Fire!"

*boom*

It just takes too long. The in-vehicle radio should take priority over the outer radio, which is stuff like enemy callouts "Soldier, 4 o'clock" and stuff not very important when you're about to get shot.

[Crush 0]

When your playing online you can use a headset and talk to your fellow players. You don't really need the ingame "radio". So your gunner will get that firing order in time.  

But the radio problem is imho a major issue in Singleplayer. Those situations, when you are commanding a tank and the "radio-queue" is full, really freak me out.

You lock on the target, and then you can't really do anything, until your tank gets either blown of the island, or the "radio-queue" has enough mercy to put you through to your gunner.  

[bn880 5]

Well, I would have to say that just like in real life, it takes time to give orders, and it takes Air time as well. This is a major problem in real life battles.

Radio comms become jammed, just as soon as a large battalion sees even one target.

I think when you give orders, you give orders, and it takes time to say all those things, taking that off would turn us into super human beings.

In OFP many of us expect to do super human things, with amazing reflexes and speed, and in real life you just can't do it.

that's my view anyway

BIS could make it so that when you are still blabbing a command you can't even select the next one... that would be even more real.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ July 22 2002,22:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BIS could make it so that when you are still blabbing a command you can't even select the next one... that would be even more real.<span id='postcolor'>

but you can still think of what you're going to say when you're talking.

especially if it's on the radio.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ July 22 2002,16:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ July 22 2002,22:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BIS could make it so that when you are still blabbing a command you can't even select the next one... that would be even more real.<span id='postcolor'>

but you can still think of what you're going to say when you're talking.

especially if it's on the radio.<span id='postcolor'>

Yea that's right...

it would be nice to be blocked when giving a command so that you can not select another until you finish saying the first one, but also a cancel/clear command should be available.

This is probably nearly impossible to implement, well probably.

[FSPilot 0]

So the army is going to be flooded with people who can't think and talk at the same time?

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ July 22 2002,19:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So the army is going to be flooded with people who can't think and talk at the same time?<span id='postcolor'>

We are using computers here. Ai have to undestand your orders.

EDIT: Actually I don't think you even understand what I was talking about in the last thread... what a strange response.

[FSPilot 0]

You're right, I don't understand.

If you're using pre-determined commands, why wouldn't the AI be able to understand you?

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ July 22 2002,20:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You're right, I don't understand.

If you're using pre-determined commands, why wouldn't the AI be able to understand you?<span id='postcolor'>

Nuts.

What the heck is this? Did you not read my posts? READ! Why are you saying you can still think while talking? Is there lead in your water?

[Kermit 0]

No, Fspilot is the one who understands. I think he is poking fun at your suggestion, which is a little bit ridiculous. There's nothing unrealistic about being able to think about your next command before making it, which is all selecting your next command before your old one is finished is.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ July 23 2002,03:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What the heck is this?  Did you not read my posts?  READ!  Why are you saying you can still think while talking? Is there lead in your water?<span id='postcolor'>

Don't be stupid.

You're saying "it would be nice to be blocked when giving a command so that you can not select another until you finish saying the first one,"

Which means you would not be able to select a command while you're still saying the first one. That makes no sense, because you can still think while you're talking. Why can't you get that?

[BoonieRat 0]

Well I can't speak for anyone else, but I for one sure cannot think about something completley different while speaking at the same time. I can react, and take 'impressions', but I can not 'think', as in 'form coherent 'word~sentances' in my mind'.

I think this is what bn880 is on about.

Its all like about the self you know!,mon!. about being one within yourself, like 'you know!' not two,... y'dig mon ...

I get well pissed off trying to control a Tank from the commander seat!. trying to target an enemy and the order gets confused and says 'go to blah, blah ,blah coordinates' repeatedly for about ten seconds!! after you try to stop the movement order and retarget, ect,anon,ect,anon! .

or trying to make a 'no target' by clicking randomly on the horizon and getting sent on another goose chase!.

There should be a 'ignore/halt/cancel last command' button that if pressed twice cancels all commands given. and a 'Radio Priority cut in' button/comand at the least!.

[Corp.Pihla 0]

IRL you have to remember that the gunner is a human allso.

When I was at gunners place of BMP-2 and in combat exercise we had close contact with MBT the commander never had a chance to say "fire". If I saw the enemy, I opened fire (when I was sure they were enemy).

I haven't played MP, yet, but I hope that someday when I deside to join the group, there won't be a gunner like Ai...

About radio commucations allso; I think there is too much small talk at SP missions. That is not 'profecional'. And allso, I have no idea, if that is how Us uses it's radio, but we were allways reminded that "If you can hear the radio, so can enemy". Due we never spoke of ranks, places, loses, ammo in 'clear', we allways hade some sort of codes for those...

[FSPilot 0]

My point was that when you're talking on a radio, most of the time you've already thought out what you're going to say. It's actually a step they reccomend you take before you transmit. Just so you don't trip over your words on the air.

So if you already know what you're saying and it's just a matter of saying it, it won't be hard to think of something else.

At least it isn't for me

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ July 22 2002,16:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ July 22 2002,16:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ July 22 2002,22:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BIS could make it so that when you are still blabbing a command you can't even select the next one... that would be even more real.<span id='postcolor'>

but you can still think of what you're going to say when you're talking.

especially if it's on the radio.<span id='postcolor'>

Yea that's right...

it would be nice to be blocked when giving a command so that you can not select another until you finish saying the first one, but also a cancel/clear command should be available.

This is probably nearly impossible to implement, well probably. <span id='postcolor'>

First, sorry I couldn't reply for a while.

Okay, if you look at the quote!, I agreed with FSPilot. That you should be able to change your mind, which is what I mean by the clear/cancel command.

The way I would like to see it is to be blocked when saying a command (ie: not be able select another) except for the clear/cancel command which would stop the command you are saying at the moment, and then let you specify a new one.

Comprende?

[FSPilot 0]

I'm not talking about letting you cancel the command, that should be implemented, I agree.

I'm talking about selecting a new command while you're still talking.

[BoonieRat 0]

There should be two distinctly different channels.

One: for information like: oh no!, two is down, oh no!, two is down. oh no!, two is down oh no! two is down..., (and the odd) tank six o'clock. yep meet you there later!.

Two: a Command Net for actualy issuing orders.

it would be easy to differentiate between them by loading the 'information' net with the usual static, but make the 'Command' net alot clearer and a bit louder...

The 'Command' net should override the 'Information' net of course.

And be880 I agree. being able to say shoot target six o'clock. then spill out 'all stealth' before the orders even out of your mouth is one of the things that causes the backlog of radio chatter!. there should be a clear 'Break in' for Command or/and Cancel button/option...

[bn880 5]

Yea, I would welcome those changes you just suggested Boonie. I mean, it would have to be tested out to see if it really feels right and if it doesn't cause confusion, but I think it's good.

Oh and FSPilot, when you select new commands while still issuing the old one, that is what creates the big queue of commands, and if that was eliminated, you would not have a huge problem when you saw a tango. You know what I mean? If only they implemented that there was no command queue, you would never have to wait long for the important order. IF

[Kermit 0]

That is not necessarily true. You see, others will still clog up the qeue, and your commands to you tank gunner will still be given lower priority than "Where are you?" and "Oh no, two is down."

Boonie Rat's suggestion is excellent in theory, although I do not know if Bohemia Interactive should spend the time to do that. There are other, more pressing issues, like the skill of the crew (or the lack thereof).

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kermit @ July 24 2002,11:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That is not necessarily true. You see, others will still clog up the qeue, and your commands to you tank gunner will still be given lower priority than "Where are you?" and "Oh no, two is down."

Boonie Rat's suggestion is excellent in theory, although I do not know if Bohemia Interactive should spend the time to do that. There are other, more pressing issues, like the skill of the crew (or the lack thereof).<span id='postcolor'>

Yea I know, but it would clear you own queue problem. Boonie Rat's suggestion is something I would vote for, in addition to my no personal queue idea.

[moerty 0]

i think they should just add a command to the radio such as "mantain radio silence" or something like that. it gets really annoying when i'm trying to give time critical orders in the middle of a firefight and i'm overridden by idot #7 proudly telling me that "soldier is history" and other irrelevant nonsense.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (moerty @ July 24 2002,14:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i think they should just add a command to the radio such as "mantain radio silence" or something like that. it gets really annoying when i'm trying to give time critical orders in the middle of a firefight and i'm overridden by idot #7 proudly telling me that "soldier is history" and other irrelevant nonsense.<span id='postcolor'>

Yea another good idea.

[FSPilot 0]

I agree (for once).

A "shut up!" command would be nice sometimes.

I know the enemy can't hear your radio, but when I'm trying to sneak up on an enemy position, everything's nice and quiet, they don't know I'm crawling up behind them, I don't want to have "3" yell

"SOLDIER! 10 O'CLOCK!"

Especially when there are 3 or 4 soldiers he's going to yell about.

[pynaple 0]

Check out the changes list from 1.46 to 1.75, think there is a fix for the tank command to FIRE!!

over-rules all the radio chat blocking the fire command.

pynaple...out.

*1.51 - Fixed: Vehicle crew "Fire" command is now higher priority

than reporting enemies messages.