Side Chat

[Reidy]

Side Chat? Whats everyone's views upon this? I know we use Command Chat which marks to all team leads however I find myself just creating markers on markers into group chat so my guys know whats being said in the briefing and to carry on if I'm taken out. I may understand in a game-night scenario to limit to chat channels. I also understand that it may of been removed due to people using the Side chat to type to each other however in my opinion this has impacted the rest of the game play for a issue which could be resolved in alternate methods.

 

What is the rest of EU'3 opinion on this? Side chat back? Or keep it how it is? 

[Josh]

Tbh i've never understood the whole issue with side chat anyway... But hey

[Tylermaniac]

All it seems to do is contribute to disorganization, because the basic rifleman has to go solely off what his team lead tells him. If that team lead gets killed, that team is now blind and it gets harder to receive orders, nor give marks on the map for enemy AI or armor.

 

I'm for the readdition of side chat to allow every player (especially new players that don't know exactly whats going on) to have a basic understanding of the plan. Otherwise it can easily devolve into chaos.

[The_Mighty_Ginge]

I think it would be good to have side chat for only the person in command so this way his plan could be broadcasted over the whole server and not have people ruining the realism for other people

[SkullCollector]

I think it would be good to have side chat for only the person in command so this way his plan could be broadcasted over the whole server and not have people ruining the realism for other people

 

The issue isn't about the chat channel, it's about map markers. Even if mission lead had access to it, no one else would and so couldn't see any markings.

 

I'm pretty sure there is a way, probably another mod, to copy each other's maps. After being briefed by their SL, team leaders should rally and fill in their team anyway, so it's just one tiny thing more to do before a mission.

I've seen it before, but I'll have to look for it.

[Origins]

Command Chat is all that should be... Side chat encourages typing instead of using the radio system

[Pancake]

Command Chat is all that should be... Side chat encourages typing instead of using the radio system

 

Which is the main reason it was removed in the first place. 

 

The inability for the mooks in a squad to see the plan laid out does mean that the SL (and subsequently the fireteams TLs) have to pass information down the chain so it's not all cut and dry.

An average grunt isn't going to be able to check his map and see all the handy little marks made by the platoon commander on how he wants a town to be assaulted. The mook needs to be told the plan of attack using visual cues on the map, follow this valley, cross this road, assault down this street, etc, etc.

The fact this is such an issue indicated there needs to be more communication between the leaders and the followers in how plans are carried out.

[Amentes]

You know that's not gonna happen though, Pancake. I wish we could get people to listen to a proper briefing, marking down things as needed, actually securing their TLs map in the event he goes down, etc., but it's not gonna be that way.

[Someone]

The only issue I have with no sidechat is that some people don't realize that not everyone can see their markers. People often tell you to go to "this marker" or "that marker" and you simply cannot see it.

It isn't a big deal, as you just have to tell them that you don't have the marker, but it happens very often.

[Colsta]

The only issue I have with no sidechat is that some people don't realize that not everyone can see their markers. People often tell you to go to "this marker" or "that marker" and you simply cannot see it.

That's when you know you have a clueless leader, eh?

[Reidy]

Which is the main reason it was removed in the first place.

The inability for the mooks in a squad to see the plan laid out does mean that the SL (and subsequently the fireteams TLs) have to pass information down the chain so it's not all cut and dry.

An average grunt isn't going to be able to check his map and see all the handy little marks made by the platoon commander on how he wants a town to be assaulted. The mook needs to be told the plan of attack using visual cues on the map, follow this valley, cross this road, assault down this street, etc, etc.

The fact this is such an issue indicated there needs to be more communication between the leaders and the followers in how plans are carried out.

That there is the ideal situation, with leaders passing down the information however how do you deal with join in progresses? This is a public server and not everyone joins in time for the briefing?

The method of command chat works well I think with a game night scenario where everyone congregates at a certain specified time however in the situation of a fully public server where people join and leave at completly different times can lead to a team lead or higher command having to repeat the brief many times or in the case of a new player at base who just simply doesn't have a clue as of what is going on With no markings where is he to regroup with his team without having to chase the "A SL" marker across the AO from the LZ.

[Ryko]

In the ideal world, we'd be using something like CTab rather than the map to place markers, because who ever heard of a magic map that allowed one person to write on it and another person to see (on their map) what was written?

 

The chat system defies much of the realism we're trying to create on EU3.  We took out side channel because people would talk over it rather than use the radios... then we didn't have map markers, so we added command channel back in, and now people use command channel to talk rather than use the radios.

 

If I could find the way, I would disable all chat channels for chatting, but keep them all for writing on the map.  There's no way to have one without the other, which puts us in our current situation.  I appreciate that it's annoying - I really do - but the only alternative is to put side chat back and start warn / kick / banning on people using side chat for anything but map markers.  And we know how that will go.

 

- R

[Colsta]

I could swear we used to have Side Chat for map markers without the actual chat. I only remember having Group and Vehicle. I'm likely completely wrong though.

[Amentes]

We did, but honestly it was insanely clunky, as making markers required a Channel change for each marker, every single time. Trying to mark while flying, for example, was... fun.

 

To be honest, I'd almost consider it to be a great giveaway for people having read and understood the rules. "Don't talk in Side chat except in dire emergencies."

 

Personally, I'd welcome such a litmus test, as we currently have a large amount of players who seem somewhat oblivious as to said rules.

[Reidy]

@Ryko in regards to cTab, will that allow everyone to view map markers with the 'cTab'? If so could we remove both command and side chat to force radio use?

Sent from my iPhone using a phone app that is really irritating because it constantly advertises itself.

[ParabolicAJB]

Add side chat, warn/kick/ban for those using it to chat for any other means than to contact an admin or report a bug/issue, e.g.

•"Do you like my beard?" = warn/kick/ban.

•"The AO is bugged" / "There's a rifleman with sniper rifle and javelin lone-wolfing in the AO = proper use.

[GhostDragon]

Personally I would like a small map mod that allows us to realistically place markers rather than the current system.

To one of the points made above dealing with someone who jips is easy, if it's a rifleman they hook up with their FTL and follow his orders (the rifleman doesn't need the bigger plan just the current task) if it's a FTL he goes on radio asks for an update and gets a brief sitrep from SL and gets on with his job.

Ohh yes I would love to start seeing some people taking a long walk to earth without a parachute from a chopper for not talking on radio to people and using vehicle chat

[Karate Pyjamas]

Removal of sidechat screwed up mission planning for me. Isn't it possible to enforce a automatic kick system that when you type ANYTHING in sidechat it will kick you after 3 times? That surely stops people from using it for anything but map markers.

 

I like the realism idea of having to "manually" copy the markers, but it's not happening and in the end more of a nuisance than anything.

[GhostDragon]

Removal of sidechat screwed up mission planning for me. Isn't it possible to enforce a automatic kick system that when you type ANYTHING in sidechat it will kick you after 3 times? That surely stops people from using it for anything but map markers.

I like the realism idea of having to "manually" copy the markers, but it's not happening and in the end more of a nuisance than anything.

Maybe the call for enforcing the rule about leadership should be made, only people who have proven themselves can lead, prevents this from happening and makes it more fun for all involved

Could have a few people who run as FTL and SL a lot run something like a induction that people can do so they know about how to lead before leading?

[Karate Pyjamas]

Maybe the call for enforcing the rule about leadership should be made, only people who have proven themselves can lead, prevents this from happening and makes it more fun for all involved

Could have a few people who run as FTL and SL a lot run something like a induction that people can do so they know about how to lead before leading?

Giving people privilege over some roles is something that was mentioned before, in the end it's not a friendly environment for new players, same goes for the TS tags and such. I'd advise against having to prove before you can take a role. If everything goes to shit we have the admins to fall back on. You learn by trial and error, and you can't expect people to do well on their first try.

Being a CO and having to explain every single marker is time consuming and gets people annoyed, which is why I'd choose not to be CO while this is the current way things need to be done. The balance between realism and spending actual time on the field is delicate and defines whether people are having fun or not. The mod suggested is something that would work, giving TL/SQL like a tablet with the markers on it. But why use a mod when the current map does the same thing, it just doesn't look like a tablet, but how does that matter?

[Reidy]

Giving people privilege over some roles is something that was mentioned before, in the end it's not a friendly environment for new players, same goes for the TS tags and such. I'd advise against having to prove before you can take a role. If everything goes to shit we have the admins to fall back on. You learn by trial and error, and you can't expect people to do well on their first try.

Being a CO and having to explain every single marker is time consuming and gets people annoyed, which is why I'd choose not to be CO while this is the current way things need to be done. The balance between realism and spending actual time on the field is delicate and defines whether people are having fun or not. The mod suggested is something that would work, giving TL/SQL like a tablet with the markers on it. But why use a mod when the current map does the same thing, it just doesn't look like a tablet, but how does that matter?

Karate is on point with this, we should be encouraging people to take the leadership roles! And this will only come with trail and error and much practice. In regards to markers it adds time to the briefing which is already too long between AOs we should be looking at making this a more streamline process rather than creating more work for the Team Leads to achieve, remarking the markers doesn't seem like an effective use of time

[GhostDragon]

Karate is on point with this, we should be encouraging people to take the leadership roles! And this will only come with trail and error and much practice. In regards to markers it adds time to the briefing which is already too long between AOs we should be looking at making this a more streamline process rather than creating more work for the Team Leads to achieve, remarking the markers doesn't seem like an effective use of time

Personally I prefer this system, it means as a FTL I only need to pass relevant information to my guys and gives me more freedom to move without being questioned by my squad, but I do put the WP and OW markers in group, I don't think it adds any time to my brief as I do it while SL or platco is talking when they raise a point and how it affects my team I mark it up

[Arkod]

If the goal is realism, then why not remove Command Channel and use Direct for map marking? (It should work, right?) When planning, leadership already does it grouped together, so direct would be the same as Command for that, but you won't be able to place "magical" markers in the middle of a mission unless you're close together.

 

Main issue with going for proper realism on EU3 is that it's still a public server. It is quite hard to limit what random people will do there - that's why every day there's talk about what guns are available for each class, what scopes to use, uniforms, etc. In my opinion it's also a reason why Leading is harder than it should be - some players just don't listen. That's why we have CAS engaging too much or MAT pushing in front of Infantry with their GMG humvee and annihilating most enemy infantry AND armor... (there should be a different discussion about allowing MAT/HAT to use armed humvees)

 

Going back to side chat topic - someone (probably admins) needs to decide what's more important for EU3: realism (side disabled) or convinience (side enabled).

[Amentes]

Direct-only would be cool, but it's too inconvenient to work reliably in our playerbase. And that's before we get to Pilots and Tank crew being unable to relay markers to Command, and Command to them.

 

For most rules on EU#3, I don't think a warning should be given prior to a Kick. The 14 major rules are obvious and easy to follow. Stuff like throwing items or shooting in base should be a no-brainer. Leniency might come in with newbies and their gear selections, and as always, it doesn't really matter what gear people wear around base, personally I'm only concerned with what they bring into the field.

 

If CAS doesn't listen and is engaging targets without permission, get them kicked. Show them that there are consequences to breaking the rules.

 

As ASL, I rarely even allow AT to run a vehicle. As AT, I never ask, only taking a vehicle if ordered to. If we're flying in, we're flying. AT has legs like the rest of the Infantry. IMO; being on the opposite side of an AO from the main force, is not acceptable. AT stops being a Support element at that point.

 

I generally agree that newbies should be encouraged to take leadership roles, but please, for the love of god, we still get so many people coming in and going straight for whatever slot sounds like it has a big gun. Please, Please, Please try doing some Team Lead before you go Squad Lead. And the same goes for Pilots, if you have questions about how ACRE works, learn that first in a different and less important and/or intrusive role. Please.  /rant

[Colsta]

I generally agree that newbies should be encouraged to take leadership roles, but please, for the love of god, we still get so many people coming in and going straight for whatever slot sounds like it has a big gun. Please, Please, Please try doing some Team Lead before you go Squad Lead. And the same goes for Pilots, if you have questions about how ACRE works, learn that first in a different and less important and/or intrusive role. Please.  /rant

I don't mind new people taking leadership slots if:

• They know what they're doing; or
• They learned how to do it by observing others;

and

• They know when to step down because they're not ready.

 

Taking a leadership slot is not easy. One only truly learns when they try it. But they can always observe what other (competent) leaders do, and try to understand why they do what they do.

 

If someone learns that way and then want to try it themselves, they can feel free to ask me (or several other people who are willing) to be in their team and support them during their first few times.

The most important thing they need to know is knowing how to lead by example, and communication.

 

Communication is absolutely crucial as a leader, and I often see those who don't say a single word. If they keep in mind they need to be talking (almost constantly) about relevant things - whether it is relaying information to their leader, or telling their team what to do, they should be fine.

 

 

Edit with personal example:

 

As an example, I only tried out leading after I observed how many people led for months, from SLs to FTLs, AND only after I was stuck inside a tank with Ryko and Lone, AND only when Lone was shadowing me to correct/warn me of any mistakes I made. That first time, I was acting PlatCo, completed the AO with zero casualties and keep in mind I had a full Alpha, half of Bravo, Hammer and I believe two pilots. On Al Rayak. When we played as Russians back then.

 

It felt easy. And I greatly enjoyed the experience. It's very rewarding.

 

If you use your head, communicate and have good players helping you, it'll all go well, and you will learn a lot.