To Teamspeak or not to Teamspeak - that is the question

[Galileus]

Yes, TS is more efficient - and so are laser cannons. So you can see how efficiency is not really an argument for TS or anything else.

 

AND if your team is super efficient then so is the opposing team. So no net advantage. - so again efficiency is not an argument for TS

 

These are probably the worst arguments I've seen in my life. If you can even call them arguments. Sorry dude, but... well... wow. SO bad.

[Brigand]

I take it you did not read the reddit post I linked?

You would think so but when you run certain applications, specifically those that use a MDI - trying to run it again only results in a new document within the first application. ie. you can't stop an application running but you may well be able to stop multiple instances of that application running. And if there was TS within NA the it possibly could stop an new instance of itself running. Of course people would find a way round it but there might be a limit to how much time and trouble they would put to doing so to cheat a computer game

 

Sorry, but your hope is in vain. There is simply no method available which allows one program to block any all possible other programs on a computer which is under control of the person who may want to circumvent the blocking. Or, to put in laymen's terms:

On my computer, I control what happens.

 

Sure, an application may be programmed/configured so that, upon starting up, it chooses to look for an already running instance and exit if it finds one. This is a choice, made by the developer of said program.

If the program is open source, I can modify this behaviour. If the program is not open source, I simply choose another program which gives me the functionality I was looking for.

 

~Brigand

[Grim DeGrim]

Yes, TS is more efficient - and so are laser cannons. So you can see how efficiency is not really an argument for TS or anything else.

In the realm of reality, which I live in, I play a game designed with Ships of the line. I was going to propose sharks with lasers as more efficient weapons, but after that AI Kareken thread, I decided not.

Reality is that a 3rd party voice comms system exists (sharks with lasers do not).

What do you suppose happened to the ancient seafarers that claimed hollering across the battlefield was more manly than use of flags to communicate ... They're dead.

AND if your team is super efficient then so is the opposing team. So no net advantage. - so again efficiency is not an argument for TS

I look forward to seeing competitive levels increasing. If I'm on terms with another group (both on comms, net zero), we're still going to have one up on those that do not use comms. But that is YOUR choice and you are free to make it.

Best of luck with your pvp career. I suspect you will adapt and smile back on this thread

[Grim DeGrim]

PS - Sorry Tom Pullings, I thought you were the OP of the thread.

[Crankey]

A squadron that uses Teamspeak has a definite and obvious advantage over one that doesn't.

 

But instant, long-distance communication is about as far from historical accuracy as you can get - perhaps with the exception of mounting laser cannons in ships.

 

I'm not so much of a historical accuracy buff to say we should use signalling flags or that people could be stopped from using TS of course

 

But what do people think? Laser cannons yes/no?

 

I've reviewed/reread your OP and it doesn't read like your later post that states this thread was about how voice comms should be utilised. Perhaps I am just reading it wrongly.

 

Anyhow, I still I think this is a moot point. Voice comms of many description exist, I would say 80% or more of players are in game with friends on those voice comms.  You will not be able to prevent this, it is a major tool for competitive and socially minded players alike. I believe we have to accept it will be a function that is used, particularly in match play.

 

Your later post is requesting whether using voice comms gives anyone a speed advantage over historical functions found on board an 18th century vessel in a fleet engagement. 

 

The answer is at the most a few seconds, if you include overchat and random comments about "Wow I really messed up that Consti" picking out instructions and requests is probably comparable. A good signal midshipman or officer on board a flagship and all other ships sole purpose was to have signals ready to raise and a telescope constantly scanning the Flag and other fleet ships looking for signals. the captain would know within seconds if new signals were given.

 

Don't forget that signal rockets and flares were also utilised and each commander always had written out extensive orders of battle for their squadron circulated to every captain in their command giving clear and precise instruction how each captain should deploy this would pre-warn his captains what his likely orders would be in the even of a multitude of situations. Much like our pre game chat during a battle count down.

[greybuscat]

Why are the first couple of replies to any given thread basically "I can't think of a good reason for disliking your idea, so I'm going to make up a contrived example where it looks stupid?"

 

Anyway, I'm all for self-enforcement. I prefer to play games without teamspeak, since it's more immersive than hearing a bunch of 16-25 year olds yammer in my ear about their problems, but I would never stop anyone else from using it while playing. A long time down the road, when we have proper navies and set piece battles, I'll gladly use it "for the good of my country," so to speak. Outside of that, cruising the open-world, I don't think a player will be at a massive disadvantage by opting out.

 

tl;dr I agree with OP on principle, but teamspeak will not be required to succeed at the full game, so this isn't a major problem.

 

 

why is everyone comparing this game to WoT?!? why?!?!

 

It annoys me, too, and it's not just here. Popular streamers and YouTubers do the same thing when playing this game. It's pretty tiresome.

 

I'm considering bringing up The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker, at every available opportunity, as a form of protest. I mean, it's a sailing game, right? You even fight things in it. Practically the same game.

[Crankey]

 

Why does everyone quote world of tanks.... its annoying (Edited from memory my multiquote broke :/  )

 

It annoys me, too, and it's not just here. Popular streamers and YouTubers do the same thing when playing this game. It's pretty tiresome.

 

I'm considering bringing up The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker, at every available opportunity, as a form of protest. I mean, it's a sailing game, right? You even fight things in it. Practically the same game.

 

I'll answer. for 3 reasons.

 

A lot of players have experienced World of tanks and in some situations the game has similarities. Clan Wars, Arena Game, etc.

 

A lot of players played World of Tanks so most people in the forum will know exactly what someone is trying to explain when comparing a feature

 

The Devs are closely affiliated to the World of Tanks team and therefore have a developers insight into that game, so comparisons to it give extra scope and depth that the developers can draw conslusions from.

[greybuscat]

The Devs are closely affiliated to the World of Tanks team and therefore have a developers insight into that game, so comparisons to it give extra scope and depth that the developers can draw conslusions from.

 

This is the only point that is remotely relevant, and even then it's dubious, as the actual devs and admins don't seem to bring it up much in the discussion threads. Feel free to link to several cases of me being wrong.

 

But it's not so much comparison to other games as the lazy way it's done. "Oh, this was necessary in WoT, so it's necessary here." "Feature Y in WoT totally blew, so don't make feature X because I insist that it will turn into Y."

 

It's a lazy argument that should be avoided unless the comparison is particular apt. Otherwise, we should be using other games as inspiration, not as a club to beat down ideas we disagree with.

[Grim DeGrim]

It is not rocket science: 

 

• people that play MMO's generally use 3rd party comms. 
• People that involve themselves in high level (and even low level) competitive play almost exclusively use 3rd party comms (eg, WoT, WT, PoTBS, WOW, you name it).
• MMO's are social games.  Generally speaking, experience tells us from the multitude of "other" online games that 3rd party comms are relevant and will be used.

 

To try to prove the sky is blue on a beautiful day ... is silly.  Why?  Because it is obvious.  As is it obvious the relationship of 3rd party comms in other MMO's as compared to what NA will eventually be. 

 

Nothing to do with being lazy.  It is just not practical.

[Jeheil]

With a modern game, competing against an ever broadening spectrum of game I would really like to see :

 

1) Built in voice comm's (team setup by default), so even if you are a wallflower, you can at least listen to your fellow captains. Even better, use the Planetside model, where there is an Admiral (who can talk to the whole fleet) and then a hierarchy....

 

2) Macro keys to effectively 'yell' a command (can also have flags run up for added sexytime) such as fire on my target, set heading too, need help etc.

 

3) Voice commands...c'mon...for $10 you buy Voice attack and macro up the whole game (I use it with Elite Dangerous and it makes the thing so more immersive).

 

Yes the game is set coupla hundred years ago...and yes ideally communication should be a real constraint.....but gaming is gaming and you cannot stop communication between teams....so don't, build it into the game.

[Flip]

 

tl;dr I agree with OP on principle, but teamspeak will not be required to succeed at the full game, so this isn't a major problem.

 

 

Didn't know you were a dev.

 

Seriously though, being in communication with teammates in battle is a HUGE advantage over a group trying to use text comms or telepathy. All else being equal (skill) voice comms tip the scales easily.

[-KM-]

As many allready have pointed out. You can t stop TS or voice com since it is a seperate application. But lets say you find some way that naval action check if TS is running and if so prevents the game to start up. What about,

Skype

Ventrilo

Google talk

The built in voice com in steam (not rly that good but it works)

Mumble

Etc

 

There is so many voice com programs that debating if it should be allowed or not is simply a waste fo time sicne you can not stop people from using it.

 

This is a  game and the aim is open world MMO, some but not all play it for the social aspects aswell and voice -com is part of that.

 

..And for those who worry about advanatages. I can tell you that a lot of the voice com in guilds are about boobs, food, what you did last summer and a lot of times more distraction from the core gameplay than a help. 

 

In more fast phased games with little time to write while playing, LOL, Battlefield etc voice com gives an advanatage but in Nava lAction I dont think it will. 

 

What is important however is that they at later stage introduce guildchat, friendlist chat etc for those who don not want to use voicecom.

 

regards

[Justicar]

Its impossible to ban users from using a third program, especially something as simple as voice coms.

Why is this a big deal?

[Jack Feathersword]

open a pubic free voice server and let people join it and join team channels..simple really.

[Sir Madoc]

A squadron that uses Teamspeak has a definite and obvious advantage over one that doesn't.

 

But instant, long-distance communication is about as far from historical accuracy as you can get - perhaps with the exception of mounting laser cannons in ships.

 

I'm not so much of a historical accuracy buff to say we should use signalling flags or that people could be stopped from using TS of course

 

But what do people think? Laser cannons yes/no?

 

Umm we are using a computer to play the game if you want to get that silly. Even if the devs wanted to prevent people using voice comms they couldn't.

 

Secondly using Teamspeak has no advantage at the moment since the teams are randomly decided.

[admin]

We cannot and will not prohibit the use of voice coms. Its a game - doing something like that would be very invasive

 

We are not planning to build voice comms in. There is enough trolling in chat (that we will be fixing within 1-2 months). Adding live voice will make you wonder and doubt the purpose of humanity. 

 

People who know each other can use dozens of secure and reliable voice com software without us spending time on making something that already works much better. We would prefer to integrate better chat and start working on crafting.

[greybuscat]

Didn't know you were a dev.

 

Seriously though, being in communication with teammates in battle is a HUGE advantage over a group trying to use text comms or telepathy. All else being equal (skill) voice comms tip the scales easily.

 

I didn't say it wasn't an advantage, and I didn't say I was a dev. Comms won't be prevented, which is what I wanted in the first place, even if I personally prefer to play games without it, unless it's clearly necessary. What is there to argue with?

 

(Is that sufficiently polite, oh wise and powerful Admin? Honorable deleter of posts! Wielder of the mighty banhammer!)

[Jeheil]

We are not planning to build voice comms in. There is enough trolling in chat (that we will be fixing within 1-2 months). Adding live voice will make you wonder and doubt the purpose of humanity. 

 

This may well be true...and what a sad design principle...our clients cannot be trusted to hear each other....there is always the mute button option....inbuilt comm's and one day I hope 'voice recognition' options will become very much the norm. Already is in that dank console world.....

 

If you choose not to enable Voice Comm's, that is very much your call, albeit for a sad reason, I support your stance on not trying to block (the impossible), what are your thoughts on the 'hot-key' comms options

 

Ctrl-F1 "All ships, target %target"

Ctrl-F2 "Follow my line"

Ctrl-F3 "%friendly, watch your line"

 

Type of things...perhaps some constrained to leadership roles, others open to general.

 

At the moment, in a non-voice environment, i effectively have to take my hand off the rudder to let the person about to t-bone me know they are about to t-bone me.

 

Another nice 'cosmetic' with hot-keyed comm's is you could run some flags up the line that signal the message ?

[Grim DeGrim]

...and what a sad design principle...our clients cannot be trusted to hear each other....there is always the mute button option....inbuilt comm's and one day I hope 'voice recognition' options will become very much the norm. Already is in that dank console world.....

 

If you choose not to enable Voice Comm's, that is very much your call, albeit for a sad reason, I support your stance on not trying to block (the impossible)...

 

 

 

Not to start a flaming thread....Admin please close!!!  I cannot ....help ....my ....self  .... 

 

Why would Game Labs:

 

• build in voice comms when there are 3rd party systems that are world classed, free, and don't require sinking limited developer time into a functionality that will be ignored by 70% or more of players.
• build in voice comms where they'll need to build additional functionality so players can ignore each other (additional mute functionality)
• build in voice comms where they will have to police offenders, and investigate bully complaints, and people that announce suicide intentions (this is real, go to Eve Online forums, CPP does this and has made international calls to law enforcement)

In an environment of limited resource (eg, developers in a small company), would you not consider it a logical design principle to assign those resources to game elements that will actively be used, and not be in the dark of online gaming realities.

 

As an "adult" (I use the term loosely, despite being mid-thirties) I have you ever been in a game where a 12 or 13 year old come on and spam comms?  And you can't do anything about it?  It is the most miserable experience you can have, and you end up quiting for that night.  No offense to 12 & 13 year olds!  I have 2 of them here, and "MOST" of the time they are great!!!.  It should be noted there are plenty of other "adults" I've lived through being worse than the 12 year olds...

 

With my OWN third party comms, I make the decisions.  I choose the application.  I have the control.  And frankly, the 3rd party tool are generally just a better product.  Games I've played where it was available, and I essentially completely ignore it 90% of the time (all top line games, with big wallets):  Eve Online, Planetside 2, Arma 2 & 3, Battlefield (to name a few).

 

Keep it positive!

 

GRIM

 

PS - I hear ya about the rudder and typing...I highly recommend a 3rd party app, and for now (if you have not joined a clan/fleet) to hook up on The Admiralty (ts.theadmiralty.eu:15477 pswd:  NAROCKS).  Once open world is done and we can select nations, there will be central servers (player run) for coordinating battles.