Useful radio communication, more human. Examples:

[ThePainkiller 10]

Could you please post some concrete example of how which radio message from OFP and Arma you fould good and usefull, and its Arma II counterpart you do no like?

We have tried to make the radio communication more human, and for this it was necessary to make it somewhat less precise (e.g. to contain less numbers), but our goal was to maintain approximately the same level of information wherever possible.

in RL you would say:

" rifleman... 2 oclock"

or more precisely while checking compass

"rifleman....at 167 degrees"

[{SAS}Silentkiller 0]

I recon BF2 had it sussed when you actually had to press a button to report a contact & that contact was then just marked on the map for only a few seconds.

[Thunderbird 0]

Do you realise how many complete lines of dialogue that would require recording?

Of course, this would require some effort and some time but no doubts that the result will worth it.

Plus, if the system is well built then it could become usable for any further game using the current ArmA II engine as basis.

Regards,

TB

[froggyluv 2136]

I'm fine as long as the messages are always relevant to the PC's position. For instance, I was just warned by 2 "Caution (or something), Machinegunner is very close to your South" -maybe not pretty, but I quickly knew where to evade.

[kremator 1065]

There is not much wrong with the radio comms EXCEPT that the voice actors need to use the same tone for the words. Get them to say the complete sentence then chop the words up. That would be better.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I recon BF2 had it sussed when you actually had to press a button to report a contact & that contact was then just marked on the map for only a few seconds.

No, that's the way it should be done, and actually can be done, at least for ArmA1. Simply play without autorevealing. Then bind the reveal to something other than iron sight view/optics, so that you have to reveal it manually.

At the same time, it is wise to rebind the hold breath function to a dedicated key instead of constantly while in optics.

I would really like the difficulty options to be different from singleplayer and multiplayer, although some settings are overridden by the server. Reason, it is convenient to use as much help as possible while you are testing stuff in the editor, making missions etc.

@Kremator: Fully agreed. It would be the first thing to fix anyway, and lets try it from there.

[sabre4809 0]

This is good. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2klEgqI5rk around 40-60. They call out an APC, close to '1'. "1 be advised, enemy APC south close of you'. Apart from the shoddy voice clip thats pretty good.

On another note, anyone else getting a F'ed up vid where sound is about 30s behind. Not to mention the absolute COD, l33t, pwnz, play style. :rolleyes:

[frederf 0]

God I hate auto-reveal. The fact that "reveal target" was default-bound right right mouse button (and 95% of players would never know to unbind it) and that auto-report was on by default in the difficulty options combined are such a pain about ArmA1.

The AI report is just far too verbose. The reporting algorithm should intelligently omit and modify their reporting information based on the situation. If the AI encounters a squad he'll rattle off 10 separate verbal reports and they are always of the exact same format.

If the AI could switch between "front, behind", degrees azimuth, east/west/north/south, and the o' clock system freely and intelligently you could get some nice varried reporting going that didn't always have to be super detailed.

[Killerwatt 0]

My suggestions:

For long distance contacts; "Man! Out to the front, front right, right, right rear, rear, left rear, left, left front". Whichever is relevant.

For middle distance contacts; "Man! To the front, front right, right, right rear, rear, left rear, left, left front". Whichever is relevant.

For close in contacts "Man! Close to the front, front right, right, right rear, rear, left rear, left, left front". Whichever is relevant.

[frederf 0]

The method I teach for 4th IN BDE is A-D-D-D, which is pretty similar to that used by most NATO countries. It stands for Alert, Direction, Distance, Description.

Alert is a proword that gets everyone's attention and prepares them to understand the information as follows. The verbal intonation and loudness can cover the range between very dangerous surprise enemy presence to a casually noted civilian one. Commonly it's "contact" but "armor contact," "audio contact," "friendly contact," are fine adaptations.

The AI seems to use the fullest description of the contact as this Alert which is very unfortunate since the time taken to say "En-e-my Arr-Pee-Gee Gun-er" is precious and the information spelled out is less important than for example, where is this threat.

Direction is the first real piece of information after the Alert and it happens next for a very good reason. Giving the direction as early as possible lets everyone look there and acquire it for themselves. The AI actually chooses whether to give this as an o'clock direction or a grid square which is neat but the grid square is usually not too helpful for short time scales. If the AI was to use the 8-compass point method if the own group has been stationary (o 'clock gets rather meaningless if the 12 o'clock direction is not obvious) or simply front/rear/right/left based on urgency, it would be better. I find the o'clock method works very well when referenced to the hull of a vehicle like a tank, car or aircraft. It is probably hard for the AI to know when it's most appropriate but sometimes degrees or even mils is proper for very exact directions.

Distance comes later than direction because it's more important to turn toward the threat than to know exactly its distance. If you face a threat you might see that he is 500m away or 50m away, however if you know the threat's distance first then you have little help in locating him until you get the distance.

The AI should allow for a few formats in distance. Increments of 50 or 100 meters is fine for deliberate reports but hasty reports could simply on near, medium, far. The AI is capable of saying the exact range with 100% accuracy of course but it feels more human to state only the detail that is relevant. Plenty of times this information is better omitted entirely.

Description is the last item in the list that covers all the other relevant information about the contact. It is of course important to get everyone alerted and oriented on the threat before you go through all the trouble of describing it. This is really where I wish the AI would say things like "Squad" or "RPG" or "Hasn't detected us."

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Lets keep mils out of the equation for the reglar grunt :) No need to confuse the new players to the game.

The "when referenced to" is the problem we're facing:

* Vehicle hull direction: Also problematic since you might be dismounted and not in direct contact with your vehicle. What if it becomes destroyed or respawns? Can it be referenced this way then?

* Leader direction: Same problem. Not always you know the direction he's facing.

* Own direction: What if the message ticks in while you are turning.

* Formation direction: Was always a very buggy issue with Arma1.

How? Lol :)

[kuIoodporny 45]

I'm supporting bravo 6's idea as it's balanced, logical, informative and time saving.

The difference in whether to tell about enemy squad or a single unit/vehicle could be achieved by 'collecting' and preparing the information that soldier is going to report.

1st phase: Unit finds something interesting in his field of view.

2nd phase: Unit says some fancy phrase like "Hold on! There's something coming up" or "Look out, there's someone" depending on situation/combat mode and while talking it scans the target's surrounding area recognizing the threat (player right-clicks on suspicious objects), the rest of the team and nearby friendlies react correspondingly.

If there's no time (little distance or fast closing in - helicopter, aircraft) then skip acting, do little pause to allow for gathering information and go to 3rd.

3rd phase: Unit reports what did he seen in single "sentence" as bravo 6's examples show.

In general I put performance and logic over language / accent purity. Short and comprehensive AI commands = faster AI reaction and improved commanding, as "voice quiet" replacements clearly show.

What is also important - death reports. An example - half of Your squad gets killed in helicopter crash and AI commander keeps checking everybody's status separately. It's okay in epic war film, but the game should make it clearer since there's literally no hope for any of these soldiers. This way he should say "a,b,c,d are down!" or even "team x is down" just like with good old "e,f,g,h move to x,y" command, the units that are alive will correct the possible mistake.

Exhausted/heavily wounded soldiers should respond after a bit longer delay that may lead player to doubt if they are still alive - it is difficult to think about what to say when you're passing out. Unconscious units shouldn't respond at all.

edit:

ah, and when AI suddenly rans into another don't make it spout an elaborate sentence - shout foul word out, pull the trigger and report "that was close..." instead.

Edited June 6, 2009 by zGuba

[frederf 0]

East, North West, etc directions are a nice alternative to formation-reference because while it takes some interpretation if you don't have a running idea of which way is N/S/E/W, there is no ambiguity with "Soldier, East, 300." There is a Soldier contact 300m to the East. After a while playing with this method you learn to keep track of which way north is so you already know before the report is given.

Yes, if the reporting individual had a "buffer" that gave it time to collect a few contacts before combining them in a report would go a long way to reducing and making more intelligent CPU contact reports.

AI Soldier detects Target1

AI Soldier wait for 3 seconds before reporting

2 seconds later AI Soldier detects Target 2

AI Soldier announces a report combining the information from Target1 and Target2.

[cm 0]

I've said this before, but I think the devs got a little confused with what people are talking about as "more human".

No one was complaining about the targeting system (well, almost no one). What people had issues with was the fluidness of speach. The huge change in pitch and volume of some words would break up the sentance into what would seem "robotic". The words never really flowed nicely, and always jumped around in pitch, speed and volume. Evening those three things out, and getting nice smooth transitions between each word instead of "Target.....THAT.MAN".

Maybe it's because your native language is not english?

edit: props to BIS for actually asking for feedback though.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Everyone agrees that the current flow is bad, with varying pitch, speed, and all that. But doesn't 505/EU version come with new voices, that the german release wasn't finished in this respect?

As for method, I see no problem with:

Target that man, 35 at 20. Yellow line showing up in compass.

Goto that tree, 35 at 2. Red line showing up in compass.

Contact, 5 at 30, machinegunner. Nothing showing up on compass.

Everything is consistent with Arma1s goto function. However, the missing 0 and how it works should be explained in the manual. Even today I see people online who doesn't understand the format.

The reports are given as directions to closest ten degrees from the leaders position. You have a rough estimation of where he is and it doesn't take too much effort to translate this into something that works for you.

If another unit is given the order to attack a freshly reported contact, you immediately know that since the same numbers are used, which contact he means.

When I or another non leading unit reveal a contact, I reveal it with also with respect to leaders position, like: "Contact, 12 at 5, rifleman".

"Contact, 12 at 5, rifleman", means I have spotted/revealed a rifleman at 120°, 50 meters from the leaders position.

Good points about this:

* All reports, target orders, and goto orders use the same system. Less to learn.

* Voicing are quick and to the point. Less annoying if voices are too robotic.

* If you need additional help to figure out direction to a target, bring up the compass that will show a line from your own point of view.

* If you are a sniper covering from a distance, you instruct the leader of a distance by using builtin mechanics, but you still have to work out the distance from your own position using mildots. It lessens the magic.

* You don't have to worry about the current direction of the team leader, formation direction, or vehicle direction.

* If you are separated slightly from the team leader and your voice order is "contact, 5 at 8, unknown", from your point of view 50° could be anywhere between 30° and 70°, so it's still not magically accurate. When the distance is higher, the angle becomes more accurate. It adds to the confusion during a hot situation.

* When you are leading, you do get accurate information since all information is based on your own position.

* Sticking close to the team leader assures angles from his position is the same for you. Team players get the benefit. Rambos get more hurt. (added)

* Red and yellow lines in the compass simulates the players need to try to interpret the order given. If you don't want this, you should get a mental prefix on the north direction and not use the compass.

From any point in Bagango in Arma1, I always know which direction is north without ever having to use the compass. Don't you? Also, I roughly know what time it is, and where the sun is. Figure out where the sun is and you have your angles worked out quickly without having to use the compass. It doesn't change that quickly during game combat ;)

The only time I want to use more cardinal directions, is during briefing, like "We're going to assault a radar station north of here".

You could also use textual additional cardinal directions in paranthesis which is not in the voice, such as "Contact, 4 (NE) at 20, machinegunner".

Edited June 3, 2009 by CarlGustaffa

[hardrock 1]

Hello all,

I think there've already been a couple of very good suggestions in this thread. I agree that "left" and "right" should be used in close distances, while compass directions should be used when the enemy is farther away.

Many of you seem to dislike the more human "left" and "right" and favour the old system of OFP with the visual clock and a direction like "3 o'clock". I think that crawler made a good point though:

They all take the general orientation into account, for example say;

- You are moving north as a squad

- You are on the right covering east.

- You see a contact

What do you call out?

Contact right, friendly (enemy) infantry, close, 100 mtrs. NOT Contact ahead (or 360)

So Calling contact is vs your squad orientation.

Why not get the best of both games? Like we had the visual clock in OFP, we could simply add a little cursor indicating the current squad direction. Then determining where "left" is, relative to the squad direction, is absolutely no problem anymore.

[gonk 0]

I guess this will all depend on people's military background... I know I was taught... DDD... .

Direction

Distance, and

Description.

eg.. quarter left, 200, man running left to right near fence.

(the reference was axis we were patrolling towards)

Now how to add a axis reference is hard due to the difficulty of Situational Awareness in PC games.

another method we were taught was the..

Clock Ray.

eg.. Right 3 0'clock, 150, 2 enemy approaching

We still use left 9 O'clock, 10 O'clock or right 1 O'clock etc just to speed up peoples ability to interpret clock bearings...

[mr.g-c 6]

Would it be too complicate and bad idea to use whispering voices if threat is very close? Some whispering voices.

It actually sounds strange when we detect an enemy very close, say 5 meters and we literally yell, reporting him as a target..

I defend the distance should be reported and used always (at least in the text).

Close distances: ( < 50 meters )

Compass Coordinates are just no good in quick situations.

12 o'clock, ..., 6 o'clock, ..., should be used in very close cases.

• Man, 3 o'clock, 4m! (whispering)
  

• Machinegunner, 11 o'clock, 8 m! (whispering)
  

Midle distances: ( 50 to 200 meters )

Compass Coordinates are just no good in quick situations.

Right, Left, Front, Back, Up, Down.. should be used in these particular cases.

• Man, 50m left!
  

• RPG, 100m right!
  

Far distances: ( > 200 meters )

Compass Coordinates + Distance is good in this situation.

There is good point to use Compass Coordinates over certain distances, and in most vehicles.

• Enemy T55, South, 800 m.
  

• Enemy "Squad", South East, 600m.
  

• Enemy machinegunner (At soldier/etc), South West, 1000m.
  

• Enemy Armor, South East, 2000m.
  

• Enemy Dragon, South East, Far.
  

Ps- Of course the interval distances could be other, it was to give an idea.

Ohh yes, that is awesome, especially with the "Whispering" part!

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I agree that "left" and "right" should be used in close distances

As many do, and all of us will do different stuff while in multiplayer since we have the option of actually talking to a guy. However, you have no idea whatsoever what is front , unless you are watching the guy giving the order. You might already be engaging something and not in direct view of your leader. Hell, HE might be engaging something in a completely different direction from the last time you saw him.

Hence it is completely useless.

No to whispering. In a hefty firefight with enemy closing in, you wouldn't be wispering due to the noises of battle. What if there is a platoon of tanks nearby and planes over you, you wouldn't be able to hear anything. No thanks. If anything, whispering only while in stealth mode.

Edited June 3, 2009 by CarlGustaffa

[hardrock 1]

However, you have no idea whatsoever what is front , unless you are watching the guy giving the order.

Did you consider reading my entire post before replying?

[paragraphic l 2]

bravo6, frederf and CarlGustaffa show some great examples.

Only thing I have to add is that it indeed is more important to know where to look before you know what you are looking at. If there is a rifleman close to my right. I rather have someone yelling to me to look right. After that I've probably already figured out there is a rifleman close to me because I can see him myself.

The AI having a buffer before reporting all the contacts is also a great addition. So if the buffer make it so that they report an entire group in one go instead of report each man one by one.

Also the reports coming from the leaders point of view sounds the best. If I do a good job I KNOW where my leader is and is going.

If BIS can make it so that only urgent reports are made from my position and POV.

"Look to your right! Contact really close to your position!'

[sabre4809 0]

I'm not totally against, something indicating what is 'Front'. But it must be extrmely subtle and not 'update' itself for some time, like 5-10 sec.

Something like a green, glowing area at bottom of the screen. Also it only shows if you are facing sort of in the right direction, say 180 degrees. It also mustn't be very accurate, and not adapt to a moving unit, and fade out, untill new contact is called.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

@hardrock: Yes I did. Did you read mine above where I say the formation direction is utterly broken (in some cases in Arma1), where I have my line formation look like a file/column formation with me as leader in the middle when we are moving forward? I'm not sure what causes this to happen, but I've seen it many times when I'm leading AI troops, other times it doesn't kick in. Might be fixed already in Arma2, I don't know. Formation direction is constantly changing based on what the leader does wrt movement. I just think we should avoid possibly broken features in new features.

@Sabre Tooth Sniper: What we're trying to achieve here is better situational awareness without too much magic going on. Glowing spots?

Edited June 3, 2009 by CarlGustaffa

[bravo 6 0]

I also prefer if the word 'meters' are taken out.

video reference:

Sorry if i somehow quote myself, but i realized, noticed and remembered from OFP after watching the above video that it is better in some cases (Close distances) if the direction is mentioned first, it is much more intuitive, effective and IMO important to gameplay.

I defend the distance should be reported (with precision) and used always (at least in the text).

Close distances: ( < 50 meters )

Compass Coordinates are just no good in quick situations.

12 o'clock, ..., 6 o'clock, ..., should be used in very close cases.

The hours direction should be mentioned related to our position, even if AI reports.

• 3 o'clock, Man, 4m!

(whispering)

• 11 o'clock, Machinegunner, 8 m!

(whispering)

I liked how it was in OFP, its very useful, direct, fast and effective.

Midle distances: ( 50 to 200 meters )

Compass Coordinates are just no good in quick situations.

Right, Left, Front, Back, Up, Down.. should be used in these particular cases.

• Man, 50m, left!

• RPG, 100m, right!

Far distances: ( > 200 meters )

Compass Coordinates + Distance is good in this situation.

There is good point to use Compass Coordinates over certain distances, and in most vehicles.

• Enemy T55, South, 800 m.

• Enemy "Squad", South East, 600m.

• Enemy machinegunner (At soldier/etc), South West, 1000m.

• Enemy Armor, Enemy Armor, South East, 2000m.

• Enemy Dragon, South East, Far.

Ps- Of course the interval distances could be other, it was to give an idea.

[Dwarden 1125]

i think the AI very often 'identify' enemy 'type' than it should ...

in most of encouters it will be like

warning about threat, vehicle/man/group, direction, approx distance

something like unknown contact, man, north east, 1km

w/o optic or enemy firing i doubt there is chance to identify 'machinegunner or rifleman' easily :)

when it's close it will be like

enemy(hostile), , closing from direction, range

the main problem is now there is way too much informations at some points where instead of geting info 'there is infantry group closing at you or firing at us'

you get tons of info about each enemy soldier spotted ...

groups and major threats first (armor, helicopters etc) and details later in acceptable amount

like out of 3 visible enemies (2 rifleman 1 AT soldier )) report is

enemy, (multiple/three) soldiers, one AT, direction, range

but i fully understood how hard is to done and tweak radio system correctly ...