Page 3 of 10
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-20 20:22
by Tannhauser
I think all that «i'm hearing the enemy» blabering should be low priority. It doesn't matter to me if the guy I killed speaks english or gibberish or anything.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-20 20:30
by Rudd
Yeah,
1st, make it an effective Communication Tool (which it is, but hearing the enemy actually makes this harder)
e.g. get the settings standardised and stuck etc.
2nd, later try and push the limits of the technology to acheive other things.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-23 12:17
by AnRK
Tannhauser wrote:I think all that «i'm hearing the enemy» blabering should be low priority. It doesn't matter to me if the guy I killed speaks english or gibberish or anything.
Oh aye totally, might as well discuss the potential for it though.
I've actually got round to PMing Jaymz about it now, not sure if he's already looked at the thread but hopefully he might be able to fill us in on what's gonna be possible and what's possible but a major pain in the arse to code etc.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-23 19:17
by Arnoldio
Automatic starting Mumble and joining the PR server upon clicking the join game button. (Was done with ventrilo, at least thats how my brother told me). Maybe even joining the channel you're supposed to be in.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-25 03:26
by cfschris
My two bits on the "being able to hear and understand the enemy" concern:
Are you guys kidding? Being able to talk to the enemy is the greatest thing since sliced bread! Yes, I know it's not in the language of the correct faction as the vast majority of PR players are English speakers, but just the fact that I can actively hear the enemy shit their pants as I surprise them screaming at the top of my lungs and emptying a clip at them is the greatest damn thing ever made possible for PR.
I mean in a sense, it's completely realistic. If you don't want to understand your enemy, then go play on the servers which are regulared by the Russian and Spanish community. I think mumble is near perfect, all that is needed is it replacing normal VOIP.
1. All basic infantrymen should only be able to communicate by regular speech only, therefore making it imperative to stick with friendlies (as with running off as Rambo, no crying to squadmates miles away "HEY, THEYRE OVER HERE!!!). This would also encourage waiting at rallies for respawning SLs and squadmates.
2. If you are in the drivers spot of a vehicle, you now have "radio communication" abilities. Also, officers, snipers, and other important roles where communication to all friendlies is a necessity.
3. Tanks, APCs, and other enclosed heavy vehicles should have the ability to communicate with vehicle occupants and radio equipped players ONLY. Although, they should be able to hear infantry as well at a much much quieter level (as I assume if you screamed really loud someone inside a running tank could hear you?"
4. Not mumble, but I kinda like the idea of the elimination of teamchat. Although this is horrible idea, what about the people with no mics? No problem. Reg infantry could still use squad chat, whereas "radio equipped" players could still use teamchat. And of course everyone able to utilize all chat.
5. Back to mumble. I know it's a bit outlandish, but what about some sort of plugin be developed which would link windows media player to mumble, which then relayed to bf2 (and only be utilized in certain vehicles)? I would forever be mind blown to be able to blast clear & crisp music while in a Humvee or Huey

Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-25 12:16
by AnRK
With regards to hearing your enemy ****ing themselves you can hear that in the tone anyway, there's no need to hear precisely what they're saying, when I (and I assume everyone else) say scramble enemy comms, I mean turn it into something still resembling human communication, but that is almost entirely incomprehensible.
Alot of those ideas are cool though, not so sure about grunts only being able to use voice comms, in theory it's a nice idea, but inevitably your squad will end up getting split to reasons other then people going off ramboing.
All these more complex ideas will probably require a PR specific plugin I imagine. Not sure if it's possible to do that though, perhaps there might be some way of creating an alternative BF2 plugin that can be used for PR.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-25 22:45
by TayloR016
Scot wrote:This brings me to my suggestion, as AnrK says, it is a problem for people, they don't want to be heard by the enemy, so they use Voip, which completely defeats the purpose of Mumble. What we need is people going into seperate channels in game, because think about it, if you are an MEC Chap, even if you heard some Brits talking, you wouldn't understand a word, but as it is now, you could get 1 squad in mumble, saying move here etc etc, some sneaky opfor guy listening, but he shouldn't really be able to understand if we are going with his in game character. However, I think if a grunt(not the SL in the SL channel) uses Force Center, then if possible, everyone should hear, because it's like the radio is being listened to by the enemy, and grunts shouldn't really use it.
Yeh i hate the whole 'we'll use voip so the enemy wont hear us' eliminating the purpose of mumble like you said.
I think it would be ok if you could only hear the enemy within 5 metres or something but that doesn't sound possible. At the moment im hearing people having the max distance at max and just listening out for the enemy shouldn't be like that at all.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-26 01:11
by Airsoft
1. Make a mumble forum or subforum so we don't have to go through these long threads

Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-26 01:34
by hx.bjoffe
Suggestion: Remove the "Close or minimize" option when closing the program.
I turn off computer, it starts working closing programs, and i get to bed. Wake up next morning, computer still on with that message imprintet on screen. Happened more then once.
Small but annoying
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-26 11:42
by AnRK
I think that's up to the mumble developers themselves man.
Airs0ft_S0ldier11 wrote:1. Make a mumble forum or subforum so we don't have to go through these long threads
There's only 2 threads isn't there? It's not
that painstaking is it?
TayloR016 wrote:Yeh i hate the whole 'we'll use voip so the enemy wont hear us' eliminating the purpose of mumble like you said.
I think it would be ok if you could only hear the enemy within 5 metres or something but that doesn't sound possible. At the moment im hearing people having the max distance at max and just listening out for the enemy shouldn't be like that at all.
Could be quite a good short term fix if scrambling enemy comms. proves to be difficult.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-26 12:11
by General_J0k3r
hx.bjoffe wrote:Suggestion: Remove the "Close or minimize" option when closing the program.
I turn off computer, it starts working closing programs, and i get to bed. Wake up next morning, computer still on with that message imprintet on screen. Happened more then once.
Small but annoying
you should enable forced shutdown

Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-02-26 12:49
by Sadist_Cain
I can hear them but I can very rarely understand what the enemy is saying because hes a ways away and I'm usually shooting at him.
I'll say aswell use voice activation! unless obviously your pc is in a living room or summin, I can't imagine anyone shouting down voip on PR with other folk in the room if so I'd say its probably a minority.
Voice activation is a easy to set up if you spend time getting it right and I can breathe heavy, sniff, smoke fags do whatever without mumble kicking in but as soon as I talk then I'm talking in the game.
I like that immersion that when I talk, I talk in game, not when I push a button and talk.
I like the idea of mumbling (lol) enemy voices but you should definately still be able to hear them and understand them if up close. run screaming round a corner you're bound to get shot, when bullets start firing you cant hear wtf anyone says anyhow.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-04-10 12:41
by hx.bjoffe
What i really would like to see is mumble interface integrated into the game interface somehow, or by an hotkeyed overlay alà Xfire.
Also an executable adjusting Mumble to PR settings/PRs own modified Mumbleclient.
With proper whispers added, key 1-9 should be uplink to SLs - and relocated in BF2
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-04-10 13:53
by =Romagnolo=
My sugestion for mumble is to have 2 activation keys (if possible). One uses only muble, other uses mumble and BF2 VoIP. I think that it would work like in real life. You can use your voice and radio at the same time, but it will be a mess! It will encorage people use only mumble when next to each other.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-04-10 13:56
by Rudd
I'd like it if main channels couldn't use force center, only SL channels.
also maybe some kind of hotkey selection to get you in to teh SL channel of ur choice without leaving game (I think there is a way to do that, but I can't figure it out)
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-04-10 16:36
by LithiumFox
Jonny wrote:The radio thing needs to be elaborated on some more.
Let say we have a load of radio frequencies, 0-127 say. 0 - 63 are for team 1 and 64 - 127 are for team 2 (although both teams should see them as 1-64). Channels 0 and 64 (ie, CH1 for each team) are designated command frequencies, where you can talk directly to the CO no matter what channel he is actually listening to, but he cant transmit to only you via that channel, just to the whole team.
Who has a radio?
The CO
squad leaders
Tank commanders
APC/IFV commanders
Aircraft
Snipers
FOs (if possible)
and possibly 'radio operators' (AKA, iron-sight riflemen, will talk about later)
kit radios are heard by the person who has the kit (and people nearby hear static, perhaps), vehicle radios are heard by either the driver, or by anyone close by if there is no driver. So you can actually sit outside your APC waiting for orders while your gunner scans the horizon.
How do you use a radio?
Tune into a specific channel.
When on this channel you can transmit and recieve.
Simple as that.
Now, I am sure plenty of people are asking why use this instead of cloning the BF2 system. Well, say you want a large-scale assault on one side of the map, at the same time as another at the other side (I will refer to these as 'theatres'). The CO can designate channels for each theatre, now you have groups of squads and assets using the same nets and who are all trying to achieve a common goal. The CO can listen into any net here and tell whats going on. You can have as many nets as you want, so you can have all aircraft fighting with one net OR all armour on one net OR all assault elements on one net OR a group of infantry squads, 2 IFVs and a scout chopper on one net OR any other way you want it arranged.
You *could* have seperate squad-nets, but it wouldn't be useful because you cant monitor all of them.
Back to the 'radio operator'.
This has been suggested several times, but not been useful until now.
Say a squad has to attack a small objective. They have the SL, a DMR, a medic, an iron-sight rifleman and 2 scoped riflemen. Without a radio-operator, they have to stick together. With radio operator, the iron-sight rifleman becomes 2ic and capable of leading a FT independantly of the SLs FT. Now you have the ability to set up a USEFUL overwatch and to choose when you strike very precisely.
You can now cut off a squad from reinforcements. All you need to do is take down the radios and they cant get any help. Especially if you remove infantry markers from the map, and just mark the locations of radios. The radio-marker should stay for several minutes after the operators death, because it *is* technically still going to be there.
One last thing:
What happens when you get an enemy radio-equipped kit, last set at channel 12, say? You get to hear that channel from the enemy team, ofcourse! Anything that the enemy transmit in CH12, you recieve. Anything you transmit, they recieve. Only difference is it being stuck on that channel. Found an abandoned enemy vehicle? Listen to the radio! Find out as much as possible from the enemy and use it to your advantage. Hows that for secondary objectives on insurgency maps?
what would be even cooler is if we had the "radio" guy... if we used the "Squad leader approval" method i think i had a while ago (when you request a kit, it does that "Page up, page down" thing so squad leaders know who is getting what....
and he controls the mumble radio XD *laughs*
I still like that idea for SL's... i really wish i had it like... 17 times..
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-04-12 18:30
by AnRK
Do modern militaries have radio operators? I would have thought given how compact communication technology is nowadays that it's be operated by the officers themselves now. Those suggestions are awesome though Johnny, never though about the kit/vehicle specific usage. You could go one further then that and have shortcuts to tune in/out certain radio frequencies for certain radio usuage, so you can have a button that speaks to the commander and one that speaks to relevant squads that need talking to aswell as typical TS style shortcuts that are usually used to talk to specific squads, not specific squads, vehicles & snipers etc.
Can imagine stuff like that really pushing the limits of the program, would be nice to have some input from the sound developers to see how much were taking the piss so far.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-04-12 19:17
by Rudd
One thing about mumble I love, is that pubbers can just get on and play. (assuming they have a IQ >3 and can follow simple instructions, and can be bothered to put 5 mins in to setting it up)
be careful not to brake that
but, I'm a moron, but in my mind it goes like this. Kits = python coding etc right and server side stuff, can mumble commuicate with that? Best fix the current problems/issues first before making elaborate systems.
Re: Suggestions for Mumble
Posted: 2009-04-13 10:58
by AnRK
Oh yeah of course, but the main reason I made this thread was for speculating how advanced the programs use could get. You could well be right about vehicle positions/kits when it comes to coding though, would be amazing if it could be made so you couldn't hear people in vehicles over non-radio chatter and such but I'm prepared for the fact that stuff like that is likely to not be possible.