ACRE or TFAR

[David]

Given the outcome of the poll was very close I am running this one as a decider, vote for what you want to use on EU3. It will run until the 2nd of July at which point we'll count.

 

TFAR is more user friendly and will automatically move you into the game channel and radio quality is defined by range.

 

ACRE will not move you into the channel automatically and is less user friendly, also voice quality affected by terrain.

[Vlk]

Any big changes to tfar since we used it last ?

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

[Jochem]

17 minutes ago, Vlk said:

Any big changes to tfar since we used it last ?

 

Last version of TFAR (0.9.8, the version we used before ACRE) was released on 11th June 2015, so no.

[Colsta]

TFAR: Radio backpacks

ACRE: Realism

 

As much as I like the backpacks, we already have ACRE implemented. Re-implementing TFAR would be unnecessary work, especially after it's apparently working, I feel.

[Karate Pyjamas]

I love the hotkeys (alt+1/2/3) for ACRE. Today I experienced the terrain influence and I liked how that works.

[Blue-958-]

I don't see the benefit of terrain blocking the radios with ACRE, yes its added realism but for proper realism we'd have a way of communicating anywhere on the map such as a sat-phone or something similar. On Takistan especially I've seen many people type messages as they can't get hold of anyone even over long range. 

Plus loved the TFAR backpacks

[Amentes]

I'd say ACRE gives the better experience.

 

Yes, sometimes it can be bothersome when there's eight people online and you can't get a hold of anyone because of terrain obstructions, but when we have the numbers on our side, 20+ or so, ACRE starts shining ever so brightly.

 

 

[Jochem]

+ While it is true that communication satellites are used (such a suprise, I know), those aren't used on platoon level comms, because why on earth would you use satellites to communicate when you're a couple of clicks apart? Sat-comms are (as far as I know) mostly used in bases to communicate with HQ, not by units in the field (except for FAC's)

[Ryko]

If we're looking at gauntlet eu3 as a simulation, it's not very realistic st it's heart: why send a single unit of infantry out on half of these missions? So let's not talk about realism when it comes to the gameplay experience we're involved in.

 

In my opinion the radios have to work, and work absolutely. Acre has a tendency to fail spectacularly and for no apparent reason. And when people start typing over side channel when the radios don't work then the whole system has failed.

[Johnson]

13 hours ago, Ryko said:

If we're looking at gauntlet eu3 as a simulation, it's not very realistic st it's heart: why send a single unit of infantry out on half of these missions? So let's not talk about realism when it comes to the gameplay experience we're involved in.

 

In my opinion the radios have to work, and work absolutely. Acre has a tendency to fail spectacularly and for no apparent reason. And when people start typing over side channel when the radios don't work then the whole system has failed.

I do agree that ACRE is sometimes unreliable however I strongly feel that most of these problems have been solved or are too rare to notice.

 

I vote ACRE because, as far as I can remember, EU#3 has thrived to provide a realistic experience as a REALISTIC server, regardless of the playerbase that often challenges that goal.

 

If ACRE is more realistic and EU#3 is an attempt at a realism server as it always has been then I know where my vote is cast.

[Karate Pyjamas]

Would love to hear more opinions from the pro-TFAR camp, so far I only see ACRE fans here.

[Lone]

Hi, pro TFAR here, as much`as EU#3 does aim for some level of realism, I have never been lead to believe that this is its primary aim, especially with the milsim unit now up on offer I have always taken and will always take EU#3 as the bridge between casual and realism. My personal opinion is that ACRE is clunky, difficult and deters less accomplished players.

 

When it comes to terrain blocking range, as fun as it can be when there are many players online, there is a large proportion of the time (the majority) where this is not the case, and the finickety nature of ACRE can cause huge problems and dissatisfaction. TFAR on the other hand is simple, user friendly and far more reliable, making it easy for new players to get the hang of radio's and radio types. Oh and as said before Backpacks :D.

 

There you go Karate, added some say for the TFAR side.

 

Lone.

[Amentes]

I still don't quite understand how TFAR is simpler than ACRE. Yes, the backend integration of ACRE is more complex, but that's not something the playerbase has to deal with.

 

TFAR requires you to enter a frequency, ACRE asks you to select a channel. For the end-user, I don't see how they're that different.

[GhostDragon]

here are my views on both:

 

ACRE: This has some really nice features that look good on paper such as terrain  affected voices. however this feature from my testing only works on new maps and with us using ports from old maps its not reliable enough to be classed as a positive in my book. The things i do like are smaller but really affect game play such as intercom within vehicles and the local radio chat, the intercom is really nice within vehicles to allow the crew to communicate effectively and the local comms seem to be nicer within acre. 

 

TFAR: does not have any of the above features but does work and by that i mean it is a work horse and offers the user more customisation options within how they want to run their radio comms. I also like its simplicity and the fact that it does not need a team of experianced players to explain to a newer player. I also like the fact that it will pull you into the channel because it is easier and will also allow the admin team to have multiple servers with tfar enabled and it will pull the user into the correct room.

 

Overall i voted tfar for reliability, ease of use and the customisation options. 

 

In regards to johnson's point i would say that this server is a more realistic server compared to the other 2 that are offered by ahoyworld. It is by no means a realism server, for that game play you would need to look at either another community or the thread created by kenny here

[GhostDragon]

12 minutes ago, Amentes said:

I still don't quite understand how TFAR is simpler than ACRE. Yes, the backend integration of ACRE is more complex, but that's not something the playerbase has to deal with.

 

TFAR requires you to enter a frequency, ACRE asks you to select a channel. For the end-user, I don't see how they're that different.

 

To me its because ACRE keybindings are simply dreadful. TFAR is much more userfriendly for someone to jump in listen for 5 mins about the basics of the radio then play tfar it is like a blooming medical procedure. 

[Lone]

My personal Opinion of ACRE may be outdated, but when I last played with it, you had to switch radio rather than TFAR's, a different button for each type of radio approach. This often, especially as a squad lead, had me broadcasting on a channel, or in fact, unsure if I was broadcasting at all, I never had this issue with TFAR.

 

 Personally the ability to enter a frequency was an uncomplicated procedure, and gave more freedom to the leading parties to split squads down further in cases of low numbers. There was also the incredibly easy splitting of squads further for example,

 

Alpha: 200 (Squad lead, Medic and Teamleads)

A1 : 201 (A1 Team)

A2 : 202 (A2 Team)

 

This system allowed for radio chatter on a fire-team level, without compromising the entire squads ability to operate efficiently. Now I don't care if that was unrealistic because it worked well with or playerbase, and if the squad or teamleads didn't feel comfortable with using it they diddn't have to. TFAR, has always been to me, a simpler but more free system than ACRE, and as I said before, especially with the release of the Milsim group, the need for absolute realism on EU#3 is just not there.

 

The way gauntlet is set up, operations across an entire map, with varied amounts of people, never the same resources (Aircraft, Vehicles Etc) does NOT suit being unable to contact somone who is less than a K away over a hill, hell Squad leads and Teamleads need to keep in contact for much larger distances if we are to keep the game fun and interesting for everyone.

 

Lone.

[Colsta]

39 minutes ago, Lone said:

when I last played with it, you had to switch radio rather than TFAR's, a different button for each type of radio approach.

 

Bit of an off-topic explanation: There's keybinds for transmitting through up to three different radios, individually. Admittedly the default keybinds are clunky, so people can and do rebind them.

[Amentes]

52 minutes ago, Ghostdragon said:

 

To me its because ACRE keybindings are simply dreadful. TFAR is much more userfriendly for someone to jump in listen for 5 mins about the basics of the radio then play tfar it is like a blooming medical procedure. 

 

Provided the person has installed the plugin correctly, the explanation is as simple as:

 

Go into Control options, rebind Radio Key 1-3 to something convenient.

Open your radio interfaces either by setting a Cycle Radios bind and using the default Ctrl+Alt+Shift, or simply double-click radios in inventory.

 

Once you know those two basic things, you really won't need much more. Everything else is cherry on top.

[GhostDragon]

Still requires the user to rebind keys though tfar is much more user friendly imo

[Johnson]

TFAR is a child's toy.

[SkullCollector]

ACRE.

 

Terrain interference gives me wet dreams and local voice is reason enough for me to vote for ACRE 100%.

The only things I miss from TFAR are the alternate channels on the same radio, but with proper organisation, they're not necessary and just nice to have, same as the backpacks. Want more range than a 152? Put a 117F in your Eagle and still have room to spare. Same thing, there's just no fancy antenna towering above.

ACRE radios are easier on the user, just turn a knob and change channels. No DAGR for a rifleman radio, no typos in frequencies. Want audible distinction between your radios? Put long-range on the left ear, short-range on the right and adjust volume. Rebind your keys to talk on the radio you want, even without finger acrobatics as per default.

 

And why is automatic channel switching such a big deal?

[RoyalSertr]

Because of nostalgia probably. TFAR does nothing better then ACRE. And using ACRE is super simple.

I understand people wanted to revert when ACRE had issues in January/February. But now? Please enlighten me what is so wrong about ACRE.

[Vlk]

Hmm. I votes for tfar. If the key bindings work, I'll change it to acre

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

[Ryko]

When acre fails, it creates a nag screen that's impossible to remove. And it fails just enough to be annoying.

 

Also - vehicle radios. Love em, miss em. 

[MessedUpSmiley]

Vehicle radio's caused much more clutter than they were good for due to - mainly in convoy - extra people being on the net, one upside was the response time; but due to TFAR not simulating half-duplex radio's it's going to be even more of a clusterfuck, if multiple people in the same vehicle have the same thing to report - such as contact - and they would just go mental trying to shout over eachother for everyone to hear.

The only upside left might be pilots not having to take a backpack with a radio in it with them, but then again; why would a backpack be a problem; it's not like they are going to be walking a lot.