For the future DCS coms: give server owners the option to forbid custom radios, and to only authorize radio rooms

[Mad_Shell]

With the upcoming DCS in-game coms, server owners will have the option to authorize (or disable) in-game coms. 

However, they won't have more control. That means that if in-game coms are authorized in the server, customs radios and room mode will be allowed. That's a problem for server owners trying to make a realistic experience, as people will be able to use fantasy radio (too powerful) or even room mode, to communicate way more effectively than should be possible with only real aircraft radios. Imagine people using room mode or creating and using radios so powerful that they can communicate hundreds of km apart from eachother in Storm of War or Blue Flag, without the servers owners able to do anything other than forbid in-game coms...

[Tippis]

That's largely an unsolvable problem, though.

If people want to communicate, no amount of server control will be able to keep that from happening and any in-game tool can almost by very definition be circumvented by using out-of-game tools instead.

While there's certainly merit to having options to control and restrict what those in-game comms allow for, it's more that this is good design for all such communication tools just to keep house, to prevent annoying cross-talk, and to just make it a bit more user-friendly by reducing what the client can do wrong. That's all fine, but it's worth being realistic what it can and can't do, and at the top of the “can't” list is preventing players from going beyond those restrictions if they really want to.

[Mad_Shell]

5 minutes ago, Tippis said:

That's largely an unsolvable problem, though.

If people want to communicate, no amount of server control will be able to keep that from happening and any in-game tool can almost by very definition be circumvented by using out-of-game tools instead.

While there's certainly merit to having options to control and restrict what those in-game comms allow for, it's more that this is good design for all such communication tools just to keep house, to prevent annoying cross-talk, and to just make it a bit more user-friendly by reducing what the client can do wrong. That's all fine, but it's worth being realistic what it can and can't do, and at the top of the “can't” list is preventing players from going beyond those restrictions if they really want to.

I agree with that, but lets say that for a random joining a server it would be easier to "cheat" by just joining the room or creating a custom radio, than searching for some discord to talk with other randoms. For people knowing each others and joining a server, I agree nothing can be done here.

[Northstar98]

+1

Personally, I'd still be in favour of being able to enforce real radios even if it could be easily circumvented using out-of-game tools.

But personally, I'd prefer it if you could enforce realistic radios for modules independently of CA, which right now doesn't have any specific radios, and so you'd have no choice but to define your own.

Edited December 17, 2021 by Northstar98

[MAXsenna]

This was just created.

https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/topic?url=https://forum.dcs.world/topic/288985-dcs-voice-chat-this-section/&share_tid=288985&share_fid=74365&share_type=t&link_source=app

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Mad_Shell]

@NineLine Can you please transfer this topic to the new DCS: Voice chat wishlist section? Thx!

[Mars Exulte]

The people you're worried about aren't using ingame comms in DCS or any other game. Most servers have been using SRS for years, and most people play along with that as it appeals to the simulator mentality. There's no reason to expect it to be otherwise now. The people who are interested in it will be using it properly ingame. The ones that aren't won't be using it period.

[cfrag]

21 hours ago, Mad_Shell said:

That's a problem for server owners trying to make a realistic experience, as people will be able to use fantasy radio (too powerful) or even room mode, to communicate way more effectively than should be possible with only real aircraft radios.

I think you are worrying too much about things that you can't control. If people want to cheat, they will always find a way(perhaps using outside tools). Trying to control a determined cheater is a futile investment of resources. Also (and IMHO), as a server owner/admin, I think that trying to force too much of one's own view about how a mission should be played on others seldom leads to better experiences, much less to more popular servers. I strive to strike a balance: by server-enforcing some basic ground rules (no unlimited weapons, no invulnerability, perhaps fog of war), and leave the rest to the people joining. From my (little, as my server almost always hosts private sessions) experience, most people are decent and reasonable; they will adhere to 'the rules of the day' (e.g. no team killing etc) and no enforcement is needed (mayhap a gentle nudge here and there over chat). Egregious offenders simply get kicked and added to my ban list. So far, the players who landed there (all three of them) did so because of bad in-group behavior, not cheating. That way, I can avoid a Big-Brother-like server setup. 

[Worrazen]

On 12/18/2021 at 3:51 AM, Mars Exulte said:

The people you're worried about aren't using ingame comms in DCS or any other game. Most servers have been using SRS for years, and most people play along with that as it appeals to the simulator mentality. There's no reason to expect it to be otherwise now. The people who are interested in it will be using it properly ingame. The ones that aren't won't be using it period.

Yes, they can keep having that option. Grim Reapers do a lot of testing and I nor anyone definitely never intended to prevent them to disregard in-game physical limitations on comms, that would be severely detrimental in beta testing, and it has a huge effect on gameplay and the way videos are made. My thoughts are explained in depth in my own thread I made before realizing this one existed.

If I may mention it: