mouse of war Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 A squadron that uses Teamspeak has a definite and obvious advantage over one that doesn't. But instant, long-distance communication is about as far from historical accuracy as you can get - perhaps with the exception of mounting laser cannons in ships. I'm not so much of a historical accuracy buff to say we should use signalling flags or that people could be stopped from using TS of course But what do people think? Laser cannons yes/no? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelowYourDecks Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 It is a game, and if part of the long term goal is to introduce "guilds/clans", then TS is and will remain a necessary element of skilled teams. There is a reason in WoT that TS3 is essentially required by all top clans. Players that intend to work as a team will move towards a system that increases co-operation. Nothing funnier then seeing people in the CW channel asking if ingame chat would work because none of their guys were on TS. Also, think about how long it would take to send and receive messages via signals flags. "range shot, range shot, broadside, trim sails, crap gotta decode, full sails, coming about, range, range, crap have to send a return message, range range, broadside, what was message again?!?!" Finally, I don't think that there is anyways to stop people from using TS. End of the day, its a game, not an absolute simulator. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim DeGrim Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 I think we should propose a ban on PC's that are newer than Oct 2013 too. They will also have a gaming advantage via better system performance. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelowYourDecks Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 I think we should propose a ban on PC's that are newer than Oct 2013 too. They will also have a gaming advantage via better system performance. I bought mine in September of 2013, so I should be ok. RIP my computer in storm battles tho, 800 ping best ping Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monfet Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 why is everyone comparing this game to WoT?!? why?!?! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim DeGrim Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 I retract my prior statement. The USS Enterprise had lasers. Therefore, teamspeak is OK. Plus, I think it would be hard to prevent people from using newer computers with all the bells & whistles that come with technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim DeGrim Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 why is everyone comparing this game to WoT?!? why?!?! Because both are open world MMO's, and are played on the Internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileus Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 I think we should propose a ban on PC's that are newer than Oct 2013 too. They will also have a gaming advantage via better system performance. This is not good enough. Computers are not historically accurate. They should ship NA source code and some candles, so we can compile and compute the game ourselves. In candle light. With paper and ink. I'm not realism buff though, so I would be fine with having a mailing list online, so that we can send our computed cycles to other players. Via mail obviously, no e-mail casual gaming! And seriously now... I get a lot of you guys are very realism oriented, but sometimes you sound borderline ridiculous to me, Being realism buff is fine, being realism extremist... not so fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monfet Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Because both are open world MMO's, and are played on the Internet. in that case, we should also compare it to call of duty, because both are games, and are played on the PC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileus Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 in that case, we could also compare it to call of duty, because both are games, and are played on the PC Fixed that for you. And yes, you're right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
De Ruyter Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 We should Delete these forums, because its completely un historical! While were at it we should also remove the devs from the game because game devs werent a thing back then. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelowYourDecks Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 #removegamefromgame I guess this is why it's called Sea Trials. The idea being, that hopefully by full release, the game is streamlined with any large issues worked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouse of war Posted February 7, 2015 Author Share Posted February 7, 2015 It is a game, and if part of the long term goal is to introduce "guilds/clans", then TS is and will remain a necessary element of skilled teams. There is a reason in WoT that TS3 is essentially required by all top clans. Players that intend to work as a team will move towards a system that increases co-operation. Nothing funnier then seeing people in the CW channel asking if ingame chat would work because none of their guys were on TS. Also, think about how long it would take to send and receive messages via signals flags. "range shot, range shot, broadside, trim sails, crap gotta decode, full sails, coming about, range, range, crap have to send a return message, range range, broadside, what was message again?!?!" Finally, I don't think that there is anyways to stop people from using TS. End of the day, its a game, not an absolute simulator. yes, (as I said) I wouldn't suggest signal flags - and (as I said) we can't stop people using TS - and yes it's obviously not an absolute simulator so we should be able to mount laser cannon don't you think? Or perhaps there's some sort of line to be drawn somewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouse of war Posted February 7, 2015 Author Share Posted February 7, 2015 This is not good enough. Computers are not historically accurate. They should ship NA source code and some candles, so we can compile and compute the game ourselves. In candle light. With paper and ink. I'm not realism buff though, so I would be fine with having a mailing list online, so that we can send our computed cycles to other players. Via mail obviously, no e-mail casual gaming! And seriously now... I get a lot of you guys are very realism oriented, but sometimes you sound borderline ridiculous to me, Being realism buff is fine, being realism extremist... not so fine. Have you come across many of these extremist guys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Corso Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 It would be impossible I think to stop people from using teamspeak. They could even use a second computer to do so if needed. Not a good idea to have rules that cannot be enforced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouse of war Posted February 7, 2015 Author Share Posted February 7, 2015 It would be impossible I think to stop people from using teamspeak. They could even use a second computer to do so if needed. Not a good idea to have rules that cannot be enforced. Yes, I couldn't agree more - as I said we can't stop people using teamspeak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rik Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 It would be impossible I think to stop people from using teamspeak. They could even use a second computer to do so if needed. Not a good idea to have rules that cannot be enforced. This. However its unfortuante... A sneaky ambush is basicly impossible, all somebody has to do is call for his mates on TS and suddenly your sneaky ambush turns into a 5v1 fight. obviously theres nothing we can do about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileus Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 This. However its unfortuante... A sneaky ambush is basicly impossible, all somebody has to do is call for his mates on TS and suddenly your sneaky ambush turns into a 5v1 fight. obviously theres nothing we can do about it Have a sneaky double bottomed ambush with your own mates. When the 5 friends rush in to help, you ambush them in turn! It's 6 birds with one cannonball kinda deal! ... but seriously, 99% of the time your mates will be sitting somewhere waiting for reinforcements that will never arrive. You are telling us everyone will use teamspeak every time with everyone else. This is simply and obviously wrong. What will happen though, is that once per many encounters you'll go against an organised group working with military precision. This won't happen all the time, and when it does it will be insanely rewarding to be a part of the experience. The world will be richer because of that, not poorer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim DeGrim Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 in that case, we should also compare it to call of duty, because both are games, and are played on the PC I agree, as some comparisons could be made, even with genres as far apart as CoD and NA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kpt Beowulf aka Kpt Ahab Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Having players using Teamspeak is not such a big problem imho because it doesn´t necessarily mean that this team wins the game. 1. If the one giving "orders" isn´t good with tactics they will have problems and not all have TS in a team or are willing/able to execute what is expected.. If a skilled player is giving good orders via chat and the team follows and knows what to do individually they will have a good chance or better to win. 2. this is not such a fast paced game as other games like shooters and so it doesn´t make such a big difference. 3. I think it´s impossible to keep the TS aspect out of the game As long as players don´t advertise their channel during battles in chat not caring for what happens around them and being a danger for the other players -> ramming and stuff - they should do whatever they need to feel better. You can´t stop time from running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Rackham Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Firstly if we are going for "historical accuracy" we should all delete the game go out and build our own warships, crew them with our mates and go and fight for real on the oceans, I mean seriously how far do you want to go, you cant talk, type or otherwise communicate with anyone in the game because they couldnt do it at the time the game is set, this is frankly what is wrong with this game, too much historical accuracy will ruin its appeal to anyone, the balance right now is pretty good, i would hate to see it lurch to extreme accuracy and destroy the enjoyment of the game: you have to purchase the wood, season it for 2 years you have to get all the rope, metal fittings and fixtures nails and other equipment. (months) you have to rent the shipyard and comission the design of the ship (months) you have to find the shipyard with a vacant slot for you to build in and big enough to build your ship (months or years waiting list) you then have to wait while the build it (years) you then have to wait while the ship is outfitted (years) You have to provision your ship (takes a weeks) you have to recruit your crew (takes weeks) you have to train your crew (takes years) Then you have to go out and sail to your chosen location(some people want it to take months or years) Then you might be able to go out and have a game and your ship sinks and you have to start again Now you can see why when if you have a job or family or anything else other than this game if you make it too extreme it will destroy any kind of appeal of the game. the question is where do you draw the line, you dont want to make something that is unplayable but again you dont want to destroy the elements of historical accuracy that everyone enjoys. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crankey Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 The question isn't that we should or shouldn't use voice comms, as many players enjoy voice comms while they game. You will not, nor is it possible to prevent people using voice comms, so the question is pretty moot. The question we should be asking is for those unwilling or not wanting to use voice comms, are there going to be in battle tools for teams to communicate orders and tactics as the Chat box is clunky short lived and in no way ideal 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoRossolini Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 I love realism, but ultimately I'm going to play games for fun. I'd have no problem with the most serious realism, but being restricted from social stuff like teamspeak is simply ridiculous. Where would the fun be then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlThePanther Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 I currently don't have a working mic, so i'm playing withouth TS and most times it's not a problem. Watching the Map and Chat works fine for me so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim DeGrim Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 The question isn't that we should or shouldn't use voice comms, as many players enjoy voice comms while they game. You will not, nor is it possible to prevent people using voice comms, so the question is pretty moot. The question we should be asking is for those unwilling or not wanting to use voice comms, are there going to be in battle tools for teams to communicate orders and tactics as the Chat box is clunky short lived and in no way ideal Well stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now