I understand why the voice channel is necessary for pilot play (in this case, on Altis), but I find it very annoying and distracting when players start chatting about subjects that are not related to current play action, or not even related to Arma itself. This afternoon I had a tough Heli extraction from an expired AO, and had a Heli full of players to move to the next AO. During the long trek over I had to listen to two players discussing lengthy subjects, not even related to the game or current play. When I reached the new AO I pulled a landing without deploying my gear, killing and injuring most of my passengers (and making me feel really stupid - especially because a full Heli is a rarity these days!). I realized that I was distracted by the two people chatting about personal issues while on channel and I spaced deploying the gear.
I know distraction is no excuse for killing off a bunch of players, but I often find myself annoyed and distracted by these kinds of lengthy BS sessions. They make it hard-to-impossible to get piloting business done. If playing ground roles, it’s pretty irrelevant. I can just turn off my volume and it doesn’t really matter. Piloting often requires multitasking and greater attention to business, and I find these BS sessions to be really distracting. I feel a bit self-conscious about Playing the voice of authority here, and demanding that other people tone it down.
It it possible to emphasize, in the FAQ perhaps, that pilots should refrain from lengthy BS sessions unrelated to current play?
Fastest way to get this taken care of is getting an admin. The absolute fastest way is typing in game (which I’m sure you know this) “Admin + player(s) name/Issue”. Alternatively, poke anyone of us in TeamSpeak if you rather be discrete… I can understand your frustration because pilots are required to be in teamspeak and are forced to listen to these pointless conversations not pertaining to game play.
You can send the message in game on a channel that no other player is in, such as direct with no one around you or vehicle with no one in your vehicle if you rather be discrete as well.
We usually don’t mind if players are having discussions on other topics, if they are in the free zone or in Alpha 1 or Bravo 1 etc as long as they follow the NAK guidelines. But if people are out of proportion on a channel that is a must for pilots. Grab one of us, either in ts by poking or in-game by typing Admin and the issue. We will come in and resolve the problem so everyone has a good player experience on NAK.
Thanks for your advice guys. I’m not comfortable stepping on others as I am not in authority to do so. The shortcomings of having all the pilots on the same channel in game becomes pretty obvious at times. Unlike in the real world where most pilots understand the necessity of not cluttering the channel with extraneous talk, people in a game like this can never really be expected to do the same, but the less chatter - the better.
I felt sorry for a guy who was trying to be seriously immersed in the ATC role today. Due to all the chatter and people stepping all over each other, it was virtually impossible for him to succeed. These difficulties have caused me to consider implementing coms in the same manner I would be using when flying real airplanes. If nothing else, it might set a good example.
Related to the com issue, I became aware today of how confusing it can become when trying to clarify which base location your radio messages are referring to. Cons would be quicker and easier to understand in the midst of busy periods if both the main airbase and the infantry spawn base had actual names. Maybe you could have a naming contest and reward the winner somehow.
Related to the com issue, I became aware today of how confusing it can become when trying to clarify which base location your radio messages are referring to. Cons would be quicker and easier to understand in the midst of busy periods if both the main airbase and the infantry spawn base had actual names.
I agree having standardized names could help. I will add it to the to do list to give the spawns better names , replacing the auto generated names like “Molos Air Force base”, Once players see the names while respawning, it will make the names more universally accepted and standardized.
Sde note: There is also nothing stopping the ATC, or any player for that matter, from entering the map and placing markers and names.
Gotcha. Had no idea the two fields HAD names! I often referred to infantry as Molos, be realized a lot of people didn’t get that it was the nearby town name. IMO, for brevity and efficiency I think single word field names would work best, ie. - “Bosco19 departing Molos to the Southwest.”
There seems to be a number of players who, like myself, are real pilots, and in the case of the poor gent who was trying to run ATC the other day, even current or former air traffic controllers. Probably seems a bit of overkill to many that some of us try operate realistically, but even on Altis I think it contributes to the immersion factor to operate closer to the real thing. Prevents it from becoming just another FPS.
I mean it doesn’t have to be REAPER6 airport in can be REAPER6 αεροδρόμιο, REAPER6 luchthaven, REAPER6 flygplats, REAPER6 zračna luka, REAPER6 aeroporto…just a few options hahahahahaha.
