1 or 2 team Mumble channels

[Meza82]

I recently started using Mumble and it makes PR even more awesome! But I recently found out that there are 2 ways to use it:

1) There is one team channel that every player on the server joins. This means that you can hear enemies talking when in range, and that they can hear you.

and,

2) There are two teams channels and you only join your team’s channel. This means that you can’t hear enemies talking when in range, and that they can’t hear you.

I was wondering what the PR players who use Mumble, or those who would use it, prefer: everyone hears everyone in range? Or team specific hearability?

Imo, its more realistic if everyone hears everyone in range, including enemy players.

[Tartantyco]

It's not more realistic to hear your enemy because mumble does not broadcast sound realistically. Neither way is more realistic, but the double channels make mumble more useful as you can use it at any time as opposed to when you're not within 70m of the enemy, which is stupid. 1 channel is just wasting mumble's potential.

[OldGoat5]

I prefer the one channel servers, since it's more realistic...not in the way of being able to understand the enemy..but more of being able to hear the enemy if he is careless...like if you sneak up on an enemy base and they are talking and messing around. its more realistic that way...i feel i guess restricted by not being able to hear the enemy. and if you want to whisper so much, whisper very lightly...the background noise should cover it....and if there isnt any...then use voip.....

just what i think though....

[Wicca]

I like the ability to hear my enemies, spy. Tell them to surrender etc.

But, also. I like not having them hearing me and telling me to surrender.

So, i think i would enjoy more the two team two channel standard.

[fuzzhead]

I prefer 2 channels.

Generally I've found that players lack the maturity level so once enemies come around all tactics/realism is dropped and running around with immature insults pointless bickering and gloating takes over the server..

[Sniperdog]

I would agree to one channel if voice distortion were possible so that you could hear the other team but not understand them (allowing you to detect the enemy but not be an asshat); but otherwise I would say two channels for now.

[Farks]

Two channels, makes Mumble more useful in combat and less confusing, and more serious like mentioned above. I'm pretty sure real soldiers wouldn't talk so loud that the enemy could hear them, or they would at least use other types of communicating.

[BabylonCome]

Mines obviously not set up correctly as no matter what channel I am in (open or squad) I can hear everybody talking on the server at the same volume no matter what side they are on.... and that is annoying hearing 64 voices at the same time.....

[Oskar]

I prefer 2 channels over one. There is a lot less immature behavior, less taunting and it's A LOT more useful tactically, since you can for example coordinate attacks with one fireteam (in a squad) without having to bother the other one.
As it is, I find myself only using Mumble when talking to blue guys or SL's. And that shouldn't be and isn't the only good application of it. I like to use Mumble like soldiers use hand signals, and there is no other way to do this with todays technology.

The only downside to this system is that players are confused which team they are in. But I'd rather have this than not being able to use the program to its full capacity.
I wish Reality Teamwork would incorporate the same system as for example TG.

[=Romagnolo=]

I like 1 channel.


Shouting "Allahuh Akbar" in the mumble during a round in Fallujah against a USMC squad is priceless !

[Mj Pain]

I prefer 2 channels.

Generally I've found that players lack the maturity level so once enemies come around all tactics/realism is dropped and running around with immature insults pointless bickering and gloating takes over the server..

I agree
Make a poll allready!

[space]

I prefer one channel (surprise surprise :razz . Often you can hear the enemy, but they're too quiet to make out what they're saying, so it is realistic. Its also far easier for users and admins, and most of all ITS FUN!!!

[Pedz]

I'd say one, it just adds more fun to the games, and that's really what I play PR for =].

[Cassius]

I prefer two channel it discourages flaming/taunting, also Americans arent supposed to understand the chinese.

[HunterMed]

I definatly prefer 2 channels!!

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]fuzzhead View Post
I prefer 2 channels.

Generally I've found that players lack the maturity level so once enemies come around all tactics/realism is dropped and running around with immature insults pointless bickering and gloating takes over the server..

agreed.

[Tartantyco]

People have some pretty messed up ideas on what's realistic, that's for sure.

[space]

If you want private coms, there are the SL Mumble channels, and BF2 VOIP, or even text. Mumble local is like talking in real life. A system where the enemy cant hear the enemy talking is unrealistic imo.

As regards to taunting etc - I don't think it happens as much as people make out, and if it happens excessively, then most servers have a rule against that.

[victor_phx]

I like 1 channel.


Shouting "Allahuh Akbar" in the mumble during a round in Fallujah against a USMC squad is priceless !

Yeah, but very often the kids just won't stop doing that. It's crazy. Right now, I find Mumble quite unusable in some servers.

[Teufel Eldritch]

2 channels please