WIP DCS A-10C and Teamspeak 3 Integration

[CyBerkut]

CyBerkut:

 

I checked out your LEAVU thread. Looks awesome. Definitely should talk at some point about the best way to do the import/export thing via sockets and what your results were (performance wise) using TCP.

 

Headspace,

 

I would say the thread was actually Yoda's, since LEAVU is his creation. The posting that I refrenced was just suggesting a concept of making the Export more granular so that server admins could have choices between the "all or nothing" situation that exists now. I would imagine such an implentation would have to come from E.D. As I pointed out, such a change, if it is feasible to code, would potentially disrupt some things in the short term. I suspect the long term benefits would make it worthwhile, but that is something that E.D. is in a far better position to judge, than I am.

[Grimes]

I have one point of concern related to the projects implementation is how strict the Team Speak channels will be. In other words how are people out of game effected if TARS is running? It is not uncommon for players hanging out to be in the same TS channel as those who are actually playing the game. Furthermore will there be a way to enable and disable it with shortcut keys or the like? Essentially being able to toggle between normal VOIP and the more realistic radio environment TARS provides on a whim would be a huge plus.

[Headspace]

I have one point of concern related to the projects implementation is how strict the Team Speak channels will be. In other words how are people out of game effected if TARS is running? It is not uncommon for players hanging out to be in the same TS channel as those who are actually playing the game. Furthermore will there be a way to enable and disable it with shortcut keys or the like? Essentially being able to toggle between normal VOIP and the more realistic radio environment TARS provides on a whim would be a huge plus.

Well, disabling a plugin in Teamspeak consists of going to your plugin menu and unchecking, so if you had it installed you could turn it off by doing that.

 

The way it works now is as follows:

1. People without TARS / not in game can hear everything.

2. People using TARS who are spectating or otherwise not in game can hear everything as well, and communicate with (1)

3. People in game, using TARS, can only talk to people who are also in the same game using TARS, within radio rules. They will not hear chatter from people in categories (1) and (2), although (1) and (2) will be able to hear them.

 

Edit:

However, that's not to say a hotkey based method of toggling TARS on and off wouldn't be feasible to do. Indeed, given the way Teamspeak is set up, it looks as if there will need to be hotkeys to switch to radios anyway. So, definitely be vocal with your suggestions.

Edited December 15, 2010 by Headspace

[McVittees]

This sounds exactly how the ACRE mod operates in Armed Assault. Brilliant.

[Headspace]

This sounds exactly how the ACRE mod operates in Armed Assault. Brilliant.

Sort of. ACRE hooks into ArmA in a completely different way (the two ways probably could not be any more different, indeed). It's really a function of Teamspeak's API that we're able to provide similar functionality for DCS. Sort of a set of "virtual channels" if you will. If you want to make it so people ingame are not crossing into the "territory" of people out of game--while keeping everyone in the same TS3 channel--that sort of setup is the natural result.

Edited December 15, 2010 by Headspace

[Grimes]

I think some give and take is needed to maximize the potential of what you are trying to accomplish. As an added enhancement to a feature in the game its great. However, teamspeak is used for much much more than a VOIP for a single game. Its a place to hang out or to see what your friends are up to. Its not uncommon to be in a TS channel where others are playing a game and I'm either playing a different game or on a different server or doing something else entirely, yet a conversation still exists. A strict rules that TARS follows is great for those in game, but not so great for those out of game. Ideally there needs to be some sort of workaround to disable the requirements completely or at different levels. Having both a normal transmit keybind and a TARS transmitting keybind would be one solution. Where normal transmit overrides everything and the TARS transmit only communicates with other players using TARS.

[Kaiza]

Wow i cant believe i didnt see this thread 'till now. When I was out running today I was thinking about whether someone would do a mod like this for A-10c and how incredible it would be. Headspace, I salute you! If I was allowed to give you more rep I would.

 

Personally a mod like this would double my enjoyment online. Keep at it!

 

As you progress, if you need any beta test support I would be more than happy to help.

[Headspace]

Its not uncommon to be in a TS channel where others are playing a game and I'm either playing a different game or on a different server or doing something else entirely, yet a conversation still exists.

TARS only turns itself on when you have DCS running.

[aaron886]

Ought to be able force users to use specific channels with TARS. If the user doesn't have TARS, he cannot enter that TS channel. It would solve the problem of non-TARS users being in the same channel.

[Grimes]

TARS only turns itself on when you have DCS running.

Ought to be able force users to use specific channels with TARS. If the user doesn't have TARS, he cannot enter that TS channel. It would solve the problem of non-TARS users being in the same channel.

 

But again that conflicts with Teamspeak acting as its own software. It isn't exclusively used for VOIP in DCS it is used as a VOIP in general.

 

Think of it like this.

 

Player A, B, and C are all using TARS in some channel. Player D joins the server. Player D enters the channel as everyone else, hears ABC talking, and tries to say talk to them. They will NEVER hear him unless they quit their game or disable tars or player D joins the same server and starts up his or her radio. Player D might just want to say 'hi' before playing a different game. However it is entirely possible player D has no clue which game they are playing, which server they are in, or doesn't even have the game anyways! Sadly, he can't communicate with them if they are running TARS.

 

All I'm trying to say is that TARS offers a really cool extra layer of simulation to the sim. However it is using teamspeak 3. A tool specifically meant to be separated from whichever game world its users are in. TARS shouldn't completely break contact with the world outside of the sim. Instead its rules of contact should only apply to those running TARS and who are in the cockpit. Everyone else is an exemption.

[aaron886]

Perhaps... but then we deal with varying levels of realism between players in the same TS, if some choose not to install TARS.

[Grimes]

Considering the extra level of realism is completely optional anyway, I have no problem with that sacrifice.

[McVittees]

When running ACRE in ArmA those in game can only hear each other (as long as they are in range and on the right channel) and those out of game can hear everyone. When we fancy a more relaxed game, we just disable the plug in from TS3 and then the channel behaves normally. Never had a problem with people not being able to just chat, as we usually disable to plugin for mess-around missions. When I'm in a serious mission I don't want people dropping in to say 'hi'.:joystick:

 

Guess this is conjecture though, as TARS may function in a completely different manner with TS3 than ACRE does.

Edited December 17, 2010 by McVittees

[WH_Boomer]

Think of it like this.

 

Player A, B, and C are all using TARS in some channel. Player D joins the server. Player D enters the channel as everyone else, hears ABC talking, and tries to say talk to them. They will NEVER hear him unless they quit their game or disable tars or player D joins the same server and starts up his or her radio. Player D might just want to say 'hi' before playing a different game. However it is entirely possible player D has no clue which game they are playing, which server they are in, or doesn't even have the game anyways! Sadly, he can't communicate with them if they are running TARS.

 

 

On a public server, I would say this probably is an issue, but since public servers, most likely, won't be using TARS due to other Export.Lua issues previously mentioned, then it shouldn't be a problem.

 

For squad based operations though, especially those where immersion is key, then only being able to talk to people "through the radio" and then only as long as its tuned to the proper channel is the best solution. Unless you like to pretend you're Luke Skywalker getting messages from Obi-wan Kenobi, in which case the "immersion" available from TARS probably isn't important to your squad to begin with. :prop:

[Headspace]

Well, let's look at the flip side of that equation. Would you want people coming into your channel and talking to you while you're playing, especially if those people are not ingame with you? It dilutes the idea of using the radios in your A-10 as a method of channel enforcement if people can get around that in spectator mode.

 

There will be minimal--if any--"taking over" of Teamspeak 3's own functions by TARS. While the API allows it, it isn't a design path I want to go down. Grimes made the point already, acutually--it interferes with Teamspeak's built in functions. The only exception to this is that TARS locally mutes people who it knows aren't ingame with you-but only if you're already ingame yourself. This allows people to spectate without bothering players, with the added bonus of blocking unnecessary packets from their stream (but that's a technical thing and not necessarily the basis for that decision on its own).

 

Here's an idea, though. How about spectators' voices are automatically routed to the GUARD channel on one of the frequency bands? :D That way, if you want to hear what spectators are doing, you can switch to guard. The only problem with that, is it would allow people "break" spectator mode. However, it does solve the problem. What's the community think about this? The original plan was to have ejected players speak on GUARD only, but I'm having difficulty trying to envision a real use for this. It might be more fun (and more useful) if you just get dumped into spectator mode when you eject.

Edited December 17, 2010 by Headspace

[WH_Boomer]

Would you want people coming into your channel and talking to you while you're playing, especially if those people are not ingame with you?

No, that's the idea of immersion. :pilotfly:

It dilutes the idea of using the radios in your A-10 as a method of channel enforcement if people can get around that in spectator mode.

Amen +1 :thumbup:

 

Negative on spectators or other people not "in-game" talking through Guard channel. Ejected players could communicate on Guard simulation the use of an ELT or other hand held radio. People dropping into the channel just to "chat" can always type a text message in Teamspeak if its that important.

 

Just my opinion,

[Grimes]

I guess ya ought to look at the way players would typically use TARS. In the example of a locked game server hosting a scheduled squad event it would be perfectly fine to run TARS how you've described it runs. Chances are everyone who is going to fly will be there already and everyone will probably know about TARS.

 

However not all squads or groups of players function the same way. 3Sqn and a few other groups I know are a lot more spontaneous with what they do. Essentially one logs into a VOIP, see's who is around, visits most of the occupied channels, finds out what they are playing, and decides to join them or not. Its much more of a social experience than a "this is serious business" approach. Those in this sort of game cherisih and appreciate the immersion of it, and would probably love the addition of TARS, however we still realize that not everyone is going to be in game... or even using TARS.

 

All I'm saying is there should be options in the script. If you want it to be hardcore realistic, it can be set that way. If you want it to realistic with those in the sim, but still able to communicate with everyone else, that should be an option.

[Kaiza]

What I would love to see is a GUI for JTAC with a stack of multiple radios and a means to ID when each is being transmitted on. That way a player could act as ATC/AWACS/JTAC for the other players in a mission.

 

By the way, I like the idea of spetators going to guard, although i would be concerned that if this is implemented, after some time everyone would end up on guard as a common chat and interplane freq, defeating the purpose.

Edited December 18, 2010 by Kaiza

[Headspace]

I am getting a demo presentation ready that will show early Alpha TARS in action. I went ahead and took Teamspeak 3 chatter from an IL-2 game, then "transmitted" it from a CP truck on the airbase next to the A-10 on one of the VHF frequencies. You can see the intercom panel in action, plus what happens when you move further away from the airbase.

[Headspace]

Here's a demo of one of the early TARS alpha builds with Teamspeak 3, using the VHF radio. All audio (other than my voiceover right at the start) is coming through Teamspeak. Enjoy!

 

[NotiA10]

looking good / rep inbound

 

wbr,

 

NotiA10

[71st_Mastiff]

wow simply awesome headspace.:thumbup:

[Zorg_DK]

Pure Awesomeness :D

[yeepee]

sounds really great :)

[beaupower32]

Sounds really good, and is almost dead on on what the real radios sound like. Rep inbound!