PDA

View Full Version : "Listening to the others' comms online" revisited



neural_dream
01-11-2006, 09:17 PM
My take on sim gaming has always been Realism all the way. With that in mind I don't consider listening to the others' comms online as cheating. In fact I think that whatever you do in the game is justified just like in war (and love, says Fritz http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif), while cheating is for example looking at the eventlog, pressing printscreen or generally exploiting software vulnerabilities of the game or the network.


from the Luftwaffe War Diaries (by Cajus Bekker)



Night Intruders over England
Gilze-Rijen, between Tilburg and Breda in Holland, was a hive of activity. Here I/NJG 2, Germany's only long-distance night-fighter Gruppe, commanded by Captain Huelshoff, was based. It was late in the evening of June 25, 1941 and half dozen crews were preparing for action.

The unit's command post was in constant telephone contact with Captain Kuhlmann's radio-intercept service. This has specially trained operators listening in to the enemy bombers on sets adjusted to the same wave-lengths. Suddenly one of them came to life with a manifold whistling and chirping, indicating that the radio-operators of a bomber unit over in England had switched on their sets to check them. And that could only mean that their aircraft were about to take off. Kuhlmann promptly handed on the news to the night-fighters. His information read:
"About sixteen bombers will take off from Henswell, and about twenty-four from Waddington."
Both these airfields belonged to No.5 Group, under Air Vice-Marshal Harris. It was known that the aircraft operating from them were chiefly twin-engined Hampdens.
"About fourteen Wellingtons are about to leave Newmarket," Kuhlmann further reported. This formation belonged to No.3 Group, under Air Vice-Marshal Baldwin.

Thus, even before the bombers started, the German night-fighters were aware of their preparations.

Hristo_
01-11-2006, 09:25 PM
Thanks, neural. That's why they used "radio silence" in RL.

Oleg incorporated it in the game since original Il-2: just press TAB-9-2.

IMO, perfectly legit and I have yet to see a specific server rule forbidding it.

pourshot
01-11-2006, 09:27 PM
Sorry I cant agree with you mate, I feel it is cheating but you are entitled to your opinion. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Hristo_
01-11-2006, 10:55 PM
Feelings and rules are two different things. My own banning from WC was not based on a rule, as there wasn't any applicable. It was based on a feeling. Oh, well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Why do you think Oleg made it possible offline to tune to enemy frequency ? To encourage "cheating" or to make a step towards realism ?

Anyway, here's an illustration. If your team is defending, you'd probably do best if you stay on team comms and coordinate the effort.

But suppose in real life you find yourself in enemy territory, alone. What frequency would you tune your radio to - friendly or enemy ? Same if you go lonewolfing into Red territory.

During our own Balkans armed conflict more often than not we were listening to enemy comms. Just as we knew they were listening to ours. Knowing the average guy on the other side, we even used English as we believed they might not understand http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

TooCooL34
01-11-2006, 11:26 PM
Online game is not real war.
"Listening to the others" do spoil the game.

BiOhAzZaRd88
01-12-2006, 12:16 AM
im with neural on this one.

like hristo said "its why they created "radio silence""

if you dont want the enemy listening to you i suggest either dont talk... or dont say what u want to keep to your team.

rnzoli
01-12-2006, 01:43 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Why do you think Oleg made it possible offline to tune to enemy frequency ?

The keyword here is OFF-LINE. In an ONLINE DOGFIGHT, it is impossible to turn onto the enemy's frequency. The MY_ARMY channel is protected from eavesdropping. It's impossible with the built-in radio channel to go out on lone-wolfing, while tuned to the radio of enemy.

Anyhow, I agree with ND, this was a real threat in the real war, have to be careful in virtual combat as well regarding what comms tools and channels you use, and what you say on that. Anyone exploiting carelessness shouldn't be blamed, should it?

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 01:57 AM
Offline it is a feature, online it is a cheat/exploit ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

TAB-9-2 does tune your offline radio to enemy
frequency. Offline only, though.

Online, Teamspeak (TS) or something similar is used. Eventually, eavesdropping will occur, if even by accident. If one doesn't want to be spied on or simply isn't ready for it, he should do one of the following:

- implement such rule on his server and hunt down the offenders
- password protect his TS channel
- use "radio silence" and pass confidental info through MY ARMY text buffer
- use secret server/channel

Comms spying opens a whole new dimension of warfare. Spying, but also serving false info to the enemy (this has been my major concern when I used enemy channel).

I used it whenever I felt it served me better than team channel. Usually when I was hunting alone deep into enemy territory. By default, I suspected the same has been done against my team.

IMO, anything goes is closest to realism. Of course, this excludes things which could not happen in real life, as most people will use whatver means available to beat the opponent.

Comms spying is historical and at times productive for both sides, depending on your "creativity" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. In no way it could be related to speedhacks, printscreening, logfile manipulation or plain old discoing.

I'd even consider <gunstat command in flight as an exploit, used to unrealistically determine possible damage inflicted to the enemy plane (thus I never used it online). I've witnessed the text buffer filled with <gunstat from same player several times a minute, during intense dogfight (apparently, he had it mapped on his joystick).

I was banned for comms spying from Warclouds, despite that it did not have a rule against it. Some even wondered if that was or wasn't allowed. I hold this against the admins, but that's another story completely. The result is that I now stay away from enemy comms, even if server rules don't strictly forbid it - there could still be some hidden rules a la Warclouds http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Sturm_Williger
01-12-2006, 03:17 AM
I have to admit I fall into this camp.

Nothing wrong with listening to enemy comms. They could still be typing "secret" info in any case.

Maraz_5SA
01-12-2006, 03:29 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Offline it is a feature, online it is a cheat/exploit ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

TAB-9-2 does tune your offline radio to enemy
frequency. Offline only, though.



Not exact, it also works online in coops.

AFAIK no online war rules forbid tuning into enemy's frequency. And so it's widely used.

I agree that those AI pilots broadcasting their height and heading are a bit unrealistic, but, as it is explicitly allowed by game commands, it's not cheating.

Cheers
Maraz

FatBoyHK
01-12-2006, 03:45 AM
lol let it roll again http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

with this mentially in mind you can do many thing as well, such as UTP DOS attack on your opponent's ip address (which is possible in IL2 days, when ip address is available in the log), and YOU CAN STILL CALL IT FAIR.

We can't discuss with you anymore on this topic, Hristo.... Simply, we are in two different world... in the smae way, you can't argue with Hilter, you can't argue with G.Bush... They simply won't listen.

lowfighter
01-12-2006, 03:56 AM
One noob technical question: were the emission radio frequencies always the same or (sounds more reasonable) they were changed periodically in order to avoid/minimise radio interception?

FatBoyHK
01-12-2006, 03:56 AM
Offline it is a feature, online it is a cheat/exploit ?

well... offline you can slow-motion, turn off some realism setting, refly the same mission, change the mission parameter, etcetcetc.... if you can somehow do it online you will not treat them as cheating....

WOLFMondo
01-12-2006, 04:07 AM
Hristo, while what you did was a novel approach it wasn't in the best interest of 'fair play'. Imagine if everyone did what you did, there would at times 40+ TS clients connected to the red and blue channels. Might as well all sit in one channel at that point...er..actually screw that, the whining of both blue and red would break my brain.

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 04:27 AM
As I said, I don't do it anymore because of perceptions and feelings rather than explicit rules.

But I'd always like to use it again, as I don't consider it cheat/exploit.

P.S.
FatBoy, do you consider multiple <gunstat-ing in dogfight an exploit ? What historical base does it have ?

If I remember correctly, you'd make a gun pass and immediately after type <gunstat to see how many rounds connected. Hmmmm, talk about worlds apart http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 04:33 AM
Originally posted by FatBoyHK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Offline it is a feature, online it is a cheat/exploit ?

well... offline you can slow-motion, turn off some realism setting, refly the same mission, change the mission parameter, etcetcetc.... if you can somehow do it online you will not treat them as cheating.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Apparently, online co-op allows it. What's your take on it ?

Lucius_Esox
01-12-2006, 04:48 AM
I have to admit sometimes for the sake of immersion/realism it's nice to be not nice on a server.

It is a good feeling to have shot down a "real" bad guy. There's not enough of em anymore on WC http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I think part of your "crime" and maybe the reason for the ban is that you intentionally went out of your way to get yourself disliked by just a "few" people. Gloating over your k/d ratio and always ****ging/taunting the opponent off isn't a good way to make friends lol.

As far as listening to the other sides comms, having listened to the above arguments I say, Ok, bring it on http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif as stated there are ways to avoid this causing negative effects to your team.

If we think think this is bad just wait till online Bob becomes a reality. I think that will definately polarise peoples affiliation to blue or red more http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Lots of people all wanting to play a different type of "game"

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 04:57 AM
That's the spirit, Esox. It is often not what you do, but how you do it.

I like to roleplay as a bad guy and I like to taunt the good guys to come and get me - if they can. Simply put, I like to raise the stakes higher - the victory becomes sweeter, the demise becomes more bitter. Funny thing, some guys were kamikazeing themselves only to down me on that server.

The admins seem to have disliked it quite a bit, but they slipped on the ban - there simply was no explicit rule for the "crime". Later I probably gave them better reasons, but let them tell about it. It ended quite harsh. Stacko found a nice "scu*bag" expression for me, and finally wished I'd "f*** off and die". I hope he didn't fill profanity filter over at WC http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

I would never use a method which I consider cheat. You can count on it, as it would definitely spoil the fun for me. Plain and simple.

FatBoy, on the other hand, is being hypocritical in calling my method an exploit, while at the same time using his own little exploit with no historical background whatsoever. That's why he is sometimes known as =AFJ=Gunstat.

Are we off topic yet ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Capt.LoneRanger
01-12-2006, 05:17 AM
Wouldn't be a problem if blue would speak German, for example, and US English. Problem solved.


Dunno, don't care. Anybody sticking around in the opponents channel cannot talk to his own team at the same time.

Maybe BoB will have something like Bullseyes, as seen in Falcon4.0. It would take a lot of time to figure out where the heck the relative point is locate everybody is speaking of.

Eightball_Syn
01-12-2006, 05:24 AM
Originally posted by lowfighter:
One noob technical question: were the emission radio frequencies always the same or (sounds more reasonable) they were changed periodically in order to avoid/minimise radio interception?
I don't have much historical knowledge of WW2, but i have some experience with modern military. When i was in the military (tanker) and we was on exercise we was handed out new frequencies every day, sometimes more often. Important stuff was always scrambled with a scrambler and stuff like map coordinates was coded using a simple chart that was on the same piece of paper as the frequencies. I imagine they did pretty much the same thing in WW2

PFS_BlackBird
01-12-2006, 05:29 AM
Brilliant to see that after so many months he is still trying to save his butt.. LoL

But really, if we would all listen in on enemy comms, a natural reaction would be that individual groups would start a TS server for themselves where they would invite people from their team only. The good thing about public comms which are available to everyone is that it unites a whole team, not just a couple.

That some ******s have to spoil that, yeah... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


BB

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 05:40 AM
Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
Wouldn't be a problem if blue would speak German, for example, and US English. Problem solved.


Cool, and immersive too. I even learned few German words back when I flew in another online sim, just for that.




Maybe BoB will have something like Bullseyes, as seen in Falcon4.0. It would take a lot of time to figure out where the heck the relative point is locate everybody is speaking of.

Never played it, but sounds very cool. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

P.S.
Blackbird, I may even agree with your views somewhat. But in the long run you'll end up playing with narrow group of people.

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 05:43 AM
Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
Wouldn't be a problem if blue would speak German, for example, and US English. Problem solved.
You can use any other language you want. I don't see a problem.

Originally posted by FatBoyHK:
with this mentially in mind you can do many thing as well, such as UTP DOS attack on your opponent's ip address (which is possible in IL2 days, when ip address is available in the log), and YOU CAN STILL CALL IT FAIR.
I thought I was clear about this one. IMO cheating is to exploit software or network vulnerabilities which do not simulate anything in the real war. DoS attack, slow motion, turnedoff realism setting, refly, continuously read your gunstats, read the eventlog, press printscreen DO NOT simulate anything. They are plain cheating. Listening to enemy comms simulates an everyday aspect of WW2 air warfare.

Originally posted by PFS_BlackBird:
Brilliant to see that after so many months he is still trying to save his butt.. LoL

This isn't about Hristo.


But really, if we would all listen in on enemy comms, a natural reaction would be that individual groups would start a TS server for themselves where they would invite people from their team only. The good thing about public comms which are available to everyone is that it unites a whole team, not just a couple.

That's a realistic concern.

lowfighter
01-12-2006, 05:47 AM
Originally posted by Eightball_Syn:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lowfighter:
One noob technical question: were the emission radio frequencies always the same or (sounds more reasonable) they were changed periodically in order to avoid/minimise radio interception?
I don't have much historical knowledge of WW2, but i have some experience with modern military. When i was in the military (tanker) and we was on exercise we was handed out new frequencies every day, sometimes more often. Important stuff was always scrambled with a scrambler and stuff like map coordinates was coded using a simple chart that was on the same piece of paper as the frequencies. I imagine they did pretty much the same thing in WW2 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If so I don't really get where the realism comes in this virtual "listening", why, you just have to log on the enemy TS, http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 05:50 AM
Originally posted by PFS_BlackBird:
Brilliant to see that after so many months he is still trying to save his butt.. LoL



Injustice hurts, what else can I say ?

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 06:06 AM
Originally posted by lowfighter:
If so I don't really get where the realism comes in this virtual "listening", why, you just have to log on the enemy TS, http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif
The engine startup is also simplified in this sim, but we don't make a fuss http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.
So far the only reasonable objection that I have seen is by Blackbird:
But really, if we would all listen in on enemy comms, a natural reaction would be that individual groups would start a TS server for themselves where they would invite people from their team only. The good thing about public comms which are available to everyone is that it unites a whole team

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 06:22 AM
Agreed, Blackbird's comment was so far the only serious and valid, IMO.

One of solutions would be to distribute channel passwords through private messages, but it could be a hassle.


In future, and what I'd suggest for BoB could be one radio for all teams/countries, implemented in game engine.

One radio for all, but with tuneable channels.

What this means is following: voice comms would be integral part of the game, not like today's TS or similar.

A 3-digit channel could be set for a mission, group or even whole team. Everyone concerned would be notified about it when joining mission/group/team. Everyone tuning their virtual radio to that number could use the channel, including the enemy. That's how it was in real life, afterall.

This would promote further realism in using comms, codewords, periodical changes of frequency, deliberate missinformation etc.

In fact, I'll go to ORR and make a poll about it.

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 06:27 AM
excellent http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Capt.LoneRanger
01-12-2006, 06:27 AM
I doubt teamplay would benefit from me speaking German. It's my native language, but it doesn't help much, beyond the pure atmosphere, if nobody else understands what I'm saying http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

But we can surely try, when I fly online and blue, Hristo. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Lucius_Esox
01-12-2006, 07:07 AM
Yes that is a very good point Blackbird. It is cool to hear people discussing their local issues, it's like being down the pub in England sometimes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I dont' know the answer, or aren't clever enough to think one out. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

One thing modelled in F4 apart from Bullseyes btw is radio strength. If you fly on a really deep strike mission you can actually lose touch with your awacs,,, that is immersion,, very lonely feeling.

Maybe apart from the obvious to be worked on in Bob such as FM, gfx, etc a really good look at the present comms system is needed?

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 07:10 AM
Originally posted by Lucius_Esox:
One thing modelled in F4 apart from Bullseyes btw is radio strength. If you fly on a really deep strike mission you can actually lose touch with your awacs,,, that is immersion,, very lonely feeling.
Maybe apart from the obvious to be worked on in Bob such as FM, gfx, etc a really good look at the present comms system is needed?
Excellent. Maybe you'd like to add this suggestion in http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m...841026793#2841026793 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/2841026793/r/2841026793#2841026793)

FatBoyHK
01-12-2006, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
FatBoy, do you consider multiple <gunstat-ing in dogfight an exploit ? What historical base does it have ?


Yeah, here you come, I know you would do it to drag people to another direction.

But, here we go. Yes it is unrealistic. But I think not everyone have a good PC and run everything maxed out. I am not that lucky, running a low end PC at that time. I have no way to see if my shot was good or not. If I can see as good as real pilot in RL do I don't need this command.

And now I just upgraded and it is a pure monster http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Now I can play with everything maxed out, and while it isn't as real as RL yet, I can really see how good my shot is. Therefore, I seldom use this command... I simpky don't need it anymore.

Well, of course you don't know it as you are BANNED BECAUSE OF CHEATING http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

FatBoyHK
01-12-2006, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FatBoyHK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Offline it is a feature, online it is a cheat/exploit ?

well... offline you can slow-motion, turn off some realism setting, refly the same mission, change the mission parameter, etcetcetc.... if you can somehow do it online you will not treat them as cheating.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Apparently, online co-op allows it. What's your take on it ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you can slow-motion in a co-op? well it is new to me.

FatBoyHK
01-12-2006, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
FatBoy, on the other hand, is being hypocritical in calling my method an exploit, while at the same time using his own little exploit with no historical background whatsoever. That's why he is sometimes known as =AFJ=Gunstat.


As I said it is just a necesary evil for people like me running a low-end PC... and now I don't need it anymore. Just like icon setting, if one day we can have realistic in-game graphic icon will not be needed anymore, not before that we need to accept it.

Call me =AFJ=Gunstat is you like. Actually I think it is a good name and would like to use it as my alias, too bad WC don't premit multiple callsign....

But, at the same time, you need to accept your alterive name, Mr. Cheater. You may not like it, but, well, it is inevitable.

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 10:10 AM
If you have personal problems with Hristo send him a PM.

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 10:11 AM
Anyway, this debate served its purpose already. A great proposal presented in ORR http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif.
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/2841026793/

FatBoyHK
01-12-2006, 10:37 AM
I thought I was clear about this one. IMO cheating is to exploit software or network vulnerabilities which do not simulate anything in the real war. DoS attack, slow motion, turnedoff realism setting, refly, continuously read your gunstats, read the eventlog, press printscreen DO NOT simulate anything. They are plain cheating. Listening to enemy comms simulates an everyday aspect of WW2 air warfare.

Well you want realism. OK, as someone said, put a gun next to you, if you dead in game, use it.

Of course I am just joking. What we are playing is just a game, I won't call it a simulation, it won't qualify as one. FM and DM aside, there are so many things that are not simulated, or just partially simulated. Graphic is one of them, radio communication is another.

If you want to remove icon, and remove gunstat command, first you need to improve the graphic so that I can see what i should see IRL. These necessary evils do nothing more than giving us the info we should be able to obtain by our eyes

Then if you want to allow radio spying, first you need to implement realistic radio operations in the game, like the ability to chnage frequency, data masking and encryption(is it available at that time?), coded conversation, etcetc.

Coded conversation is the most used way to fight against spying. However, please be *realistic*... think about it, we all come from different part of the world, we don't have time to train for years before go out for a mission.... and WE CAN CHANGE TEAM AT ANY TIME WE LIKE.

It is stupid to think you can train everyone with a set of codes.... and you need to change it frequently??? You must be insane. OK even you do it, once any one of us change his team everything is busted....

A game is only a game and we simply can't, and shouldn't brutally apply our ideallistic thinking into it. There is something that cannot be simulated. Necessary evils are always needed, in this case, it is the banning of spying.

Or, you can strictly forbit anybody from switching team, and strictly enforce military-grade communication proceedure. And com'on, you know it is impossible.

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 10:44 AM
That pathetic argument "put a gun next to you, if you dead in game, use it" has been used numerously times against DiD and is completely irrelevant to what we discuss.

What's wrong with not allowing sitching teams during an ongoing mission?

You don't like more realism in the comms of this sim. You made your point clear and that's perfectly fine http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

FatBoyHK
01-12-2006, 11:03 AM
don't feel bad, neural_dream. As i said it is just a joke.

But I did make my point. Something can't be simulated.

We simply can't allow spying, while keep it in a realistic matter. IRL we seldom change team. In game we can't stop people from doing this. Even if you can, by some kind of username-password approach, you must realize that we are in the internet age, and in the internet, you don't know who is who. and internet is fast, you can spread info with great speed and ease. Some ******s can, and will, do what they call "what it takes" to obtain the "legal" advantage. Obviously, internet is not available in 1940's.

To conclude, spying is there IRL, as well as your usually stable allegance to a team, your usually one-and-only-one identity, secure radio operation proceddue, and the fact that serect can be kept for some time, and the fact that even it is busted it will take some time to reach the other side of the fetch. If you can't provide that, we should not allow spying.

Think about RTS games, if you give one side a weapon and don't give another side a effective counter, the game will be un-balanced. And un-balanced = no fun.

SlickStick
01-12-2006, 11:46 AM
What a joke. A thread to allow even easier point/stat-whoring on WC, which is basically all that server is full of anyways. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

In RL, radios broadcasted on open frequencies and could easily be intercepted, this is true. However, just allowing eavesdropping in the game, without any way to protect yourself, besides going to private comms or using "coded" language, is basically just a lazy way to attempt to cheat. Nothing more.

You don't want to work for anything, you want to know exactly where the enemy is, when they will be there and who will be with them, without their knowing. Espionage is one thing, but considering the way this comms cheat was being used, I just have to chuckle to myself how you are attempting to compare RL and a simulation this way.

Fatboy, my gut tells me that you're a BSer, personally. 10 will get you 20 that you're using the <gunstat command to attempt to induce server lag, as it makes the server respond everytime you enter the command and can give just enough to escape a shot from a bogey. Typical. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

It reminds me of the Athlon64, X800, 2GB RAM super-machine guys with a 35mS ping that cause a freeze or warp-slide everytime you engage them and they spiel another BS line like yours about settings or lag and yet, it's only when they are on the defense that they freeze and lag. Funny, huh?

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 12:15 PM
OK, maybe it is time to head to ORR and say what you have to say about the "one radio for all" idea. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/2841026793/showpollresults/Y)

This thread has gone sideways several times in several directions and it is hard to keep it off of it as it involves personal accusations.

I really have nothing to add to my version of Warclouds incident, except what I already said. The subsequent banning, much to the joy of some, was based on a non-existant rule, but that's not important anymore.

I won't comment much on Fatboy's <gunstatting, except that I distinctly remember him using a 30"-something LCD and a HAL modded Cougar at the time. Those are hardly indicators of a low-end system http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by SlickStick:
However, just allowing eavesdropping in the game, without any way to protect yourself, besides going to private comms or using "coded" language, is basically just a lazy way to attempt to cheat. Nothing more.




SlickStick, statistical chance to be spied on as in my suggestion would be 1 out of 1000. Unless someone on your team works for the enemy and anounces to him the frequency used. Then it is treason - another historical feature http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

The beauty of it is that it cuts both ways and is totally unpredictable. You never know what you can hear next second or if anyone is spying on you.

Codewords and radio procedure - what could be bad about it in a serious combat flight simulator ?

Still, some may not be able to handle it. For those, a simple server switch could be implemented, just as you can set other server settings.

OldMan____
01-12-2006, 12:53 PM
Funny. I never tried to listen enemy cooms sicne even allieds coms in WC ususally makes WC server to lost my cnx. So I never use TS.


But by my " good sense of right and wrong" I would never think in that as an exploit, in fact I tought It was allowed, But I would fore sure consider bad usage of gunstat as an exploit. And In my mind anyone that does that IS a cheater (since in RL is impossile to know the exact number of bullets hitting). IF I had a server, these would be MY rules.

But everyone is free to think different.

FatBoyHK
01-12-2006, 01:11 PM
Fatboy, my gut tells me that you're a BSer, personally. 10 will get you 20 that you're using the <gunstat command to attempt to induce server lag, as it makes the server respond everytime you enter the command and can give just enough to escape a shot from a bogey. Typical.

??? I am confused, you agree my point then say I am a typical BSer ???

And use gunstat command to lag the server so I can escape???

Suddenly it is all about me in this thread, well done Hristo, but I know it is gonna happen once I reply to this thread http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 01:21 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif lol.

No more flaming and cheating accusations in this discussion plz. It's a theoretical one. I won't start a "start eavesdropping in WarClouds" campaign http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif.

FatBoyHK
01-12-2006, 01:24 PM
I won't comment much on Fatboy's <gunstatting, except that I distinctly remember him using a 30"-something LCD and a HAL modded Cougar at the time. Those are hardly indicators of a low-end system

Ha, Hristo, I think you like football. Let me reply you with something related to football

I don't like Chealsa's manager Jose Mourinho either, but i do like his comment when he said Arsenal's manger Arsene Wenger is a voyeur http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Yes I have a 26" LCD. and yes I have a modded Cougar. I have a monster PC also, but it is a monster in 2003 standard. Voyuer won't see everything, nor they have good memory i guess....and how about creditability? I have nothing to add.

SlickStick
01-12-2006, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by FatBoyHK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Fatboy, my gut tells me that you're a BSer, personally. 10 will get you 20 that you're using the <gunstat command to attempt to induce server lag, as it makes the server respond everytime you enter the command and can give just enough to escape a shot from a bogey. Typical.

??? I am confused, you agree my point then say I am a typical BSer ???

And use gunstat command to lag the server so I can escape???

Suddenly it is all about me in this thread, well done Hristo, but I know it is gonna happen once I reply to this thread http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I disagree with your excuse for why you were constantly making the server show gunstat is all. I think what you wrote as an excuse is a crock of sh*t. Crystal clear now? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 01:28 PM
Flamewar? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/JMSAndre/Stills/DrStrangelove01.jpg
GENTLEMEN. YOU CAN'T FIGHT HERE. THIS IS THE WAR ROOM.

FatBoyHK
01-12-2006, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by SlickStick:
I disagree with your excuse for why you were constantly making the server show gunstat is all. I think what you wrote as an excuse is a crock of sh*t. Crystal clear now? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

agree or disagree, fact is I don't do this anymore. I do this just because of my PC's limitation, and after a big upgrade I don't need this anymore.

danjama
01-12-2006, 02:47 PM
Id rather be on TS with my team than with the enemy team!

BSS_CUDA
01-12-2006, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by Hristo:
I would never use a method which I consider cheat.

well here lies the problem now doesnt it. Obviously what you considered cheating and what the MAJORITY of people that fly are 2 different things. ok first time can be excused. But you recieved MORE than one warning to stop yet you continued. hence the label cheat and hense the ban. print screen is allowed in the game also yet we call those who exploit it cheaters.
just because it's available doesnt mean its proper.

As for listening to enemy comms. yes it happened in the war, but if memory serves they didnt send a message to the enemy with the frequency they would be communicating now did they. the warclouds comms were set up in the interest of community interaction and "FAIR PLAY" a concept that you have proven you know nothing about. you took advantage of a situation that was set up to benifit everyone and abused it. and not just one time you did it multiple times after being warned. you deserve your label live with it.

SlickStick
01-12-2006, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristo:
I would never use a method which I consider cheat.

well here lies the problem now doesnt it. Obviously what you considered cheating and what the MAJORITY of people that fly are 2 different things. ok first time can be excused. But you recieved MORE than one warning to stop yet you continued. hence the label cheat and hense the ban. print screen is allowed in the game also yet we call those who exploit it cheaters also.
just because it's available doesnt mean its proper.

As for listening to enemy comms. yes it happened in the war, but if memory serves they didnt send a message to the enemy with the frequency they would be communicating now did they. the warclouds comms were set up in the interest of community interaction and "FAIR PLAY" a concept that you have proven you know nothing about. you took advantage of a situation that was set up to benifit everyone and abused it. and not just one time you did it multiple times after being warned. you deserve your label live with it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ooh, I get all excited and tingly inside when you post like that Cuda. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

BSS_CUDA
01-12-2006, 03:05 PM
as someone once said, if he wants realism strap a gun to his monitor. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
as someone once said, if he wants realism strap a gun to his monitor. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif NOT AGAIN. I beg you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:


well here lies the problem now doesnt it. Obviously what you considered cheating and what the MAJORITY of people that fly are 2 different things. ok first time can be excused. But you recieved MORE than one warning to stop yet you continued. hence the label cheat and hense the ban.


False.

No warning whatsoever. Want me to repeat ? No warning whatsoever before the ban. Is that clear enough ?

One admin (Stacko) knew about it and didn't say anything was wrong at the time. Do you know what his exact words were when he first found out I was on enemy comms ? He said "I don't condemn it, but I don't encourage it either.". It could stop right there, if he had been more resolute in his wording. After his reply, I normally went on with it.

Apparently, days later he changed his mind and "warned me" by removing me from enemy channel. I remember that situation, but I was already logged off and considered the "moving" as some strange glitch on TS part. Again, he didn't say anything. The ban itself was him reporting it to another, more capable admin (exos) who finally imposed the ban. Yet, I still don't know what rule they based their decision on. Why didn't Stacko warn me ? Why didn't Stacko ban me ? Why he had to tell exos (Red team admin) to do it ? Only he can answer that. IMO, he wasn't up to his admin duty in that particular situation. It would be only natural that the ban came from Blue team admin and the one who knew about it first. His final insults (sc*mbag, sc*m, f*ck off and die) thrown at me only add to the picture.

What majority of players ? It was no secret from guys I regularly winged with. They didn't mind.



print screen is allowed in the game also yet we call those who exploit it cheaters.
just because it's available doesnt mean its proper.


Reread the thread. What historical occurence does printscreening simulate ?



As for listening to enemy comms. yes it happened in the war, but if memory serves they didnt send a message to the enemy with the frequency they would be communicating now did they. the warclouds comms were set up in the interest of community interaction and "FAIR PLAY" a concept that you have proven you know nothing about. you took advantage of a situation that was set up to benifit everyone and abused it. and not just one time you did it multiple times after being warned. you deserve your label live with it.


"a concept that you have proven you know nothing about"

You read the 12 commandments of flaming (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4431074793), didn't you ? It shows http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Again, no warning whatsoever. What would it cost them to say or write on forums "Hristo, you were a bad boy, don't eavesdrop" ? Yet, they were quick to call ma a scu*bag and wished me to f*ck off and die though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

neural_dream
01-12-2006, 03:44 PM
I didn't start this thread for Hristo. I was reading a book and thought that would be a good subject to discuss.

So, if you continue attacking him instead of taking part in the discussion, I will take that as at least impolite http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif.

Jetbuff
01-12-2006, 04:40 PM
For all who think it's OK to do this, I have a question: is winning at all costs really worth it? I wouldn't label switching to enemy channel cheating, but it's dodgy enough that I try not to do it personally.

VFS-22_SPaRX
01-12-2006, 05:33 PM
My take on this is in real life it happened. But it was not EASY to do this either. It wasnt as simple as just finding the radio frequency and listening in . There were code words, Brevity codes to learn, Code names for planes, code names for target areas, and many OTHER factors. These are not present when we are gaming using Voice Comms. Sure we could implement most of this, but is it really feasible to create a system of code words and brevity that must be taught to EVERY new player that joins in a server session or coop? Not really. Fighter Pilots did not scan these channels from their planes. Infact i am sure that most of them did not tune them in. Why? How could they communicate with their wingman and central command? From my understanding, most of the 'ease dropping' was done from ground stations and Relayed to the pilots. So who wants to sit in Teamspeak all night and play Ground Control? Any takers? We havent even gotten into language barriers. How many US pilots could speak German or Japanese and vice versa. I would bet that it wasnt many at all. This is not simulated either.

Basically I guess I could sum it up like this. There are too many factors not simulated when playing on Servers or in Coops and therefore should not be allowed for the sake of Gameplay and Fairness.

Another point i would like to make as well. Why would a player use a different name on a Voice comms then what he is using in game if he didnt feel like it wasnt a little bit of a cheat? Why not just have both names be the same. Then you COULD be caught and shot like in real life?

PFS_BlackBird
01-12-2006, 05:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PFS_BlackBird:
Brilliant to see that after so many months he is still trying to save his butt.. LoL

This isn't about Hristo.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is. Just sit and watch.


BB

John_Wayne_
01-12-2006, 05:43 PM
LMAO

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by VFS-22_SPaRX:


Another point i would like to make as well. Why would a player use a different name on a Voice comms then what he is using in game if he didnt feel like it wasnt a little bit of a cheat? Why not just have both names be the same. Then you COULD be caught and shot like in real life?

Caught and shot ? I believe you are confusing radio intercepts with classic spying, as done by Kim Philby or Mata Hari (she indeed was brought before firing squad).

Also, I believe you know how radio works. In real life you don't see a name flash before you when a person speaks over radio. Much less so when a person only listens to your radio.

How could anyone "catch" a person listening to other radio channel in his own plane in real life ? Listening to radio is a passive activity and there is no way to detect it even today. In no way you can determine who is listening to your radio signals. You can only guess, at best.

Random name is just a measure for no name at all, which is currently impossible with TS.

Some people speak more than one language. I would find my way with English, German or Russian language over radio. Sometimes even by the tone of voices you'd know what may be happening - which is quite useful.

All in all, I believe you overzealous and at times incompetent Warclouds admins not only slipped on your own rules, but made a step away from realism we all like to strive to. I sincerely hope you'd instruct them better in the future.

Hristo_
01-12-2006, 11:00 PM
Another historical account, taken from here: http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/shesta/shesta.htm


....
In reality, Rudel survived the war. No other famous Stuka ace was killed on 13 March 1944, nor is it known that Rudel ever flew a Ju 87 with a viper painted on its fuselage side (although he used a Ju 87 with a chevron painted on the fuselage side, which was quite unsusual in the Stuka units).

'It is quite possible that this is a nice story to cover up how one of the highly esteemed fighter pilots was killed in a fight with a single Ju 87', according to Rodion Podorozhny. In his autobiography, Hans-Ulrich Rudel recalls how his Ju 87 once came under attack from 'an excellent "Lag-5" pilot': 'I just can't understand how he manages to follow my sharp turns in his fighter aircraft', wrote Rudel: 'Sweat poured from my forehead.' Rudel started preparing himself for the final end, as he suddenly heard his rear-gunner, Stabsarzt Ernst Gadermann, cry over the R/T: 'Got the Lag!' <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Rudel continues: 'Was he shot down by Gadermann, or did he go down because of the backwash from my engine during these tight turns? It doesn't matter. My headphones suddenly explode in confused screams from the Russian radio; the Russians have observed what happened and something special seems to have happened... From the Russian radio-messages, we discover that this was a very famous Soviet fighter pilot, more than once appointed as Hero of the Soviet Union.' </span>(This is an excerpt from Christer Bergstr¶m's book 'RED STAR - BLACK CROSS; Russian and German Fighter Pilots in Combat 1941-1945', which will be published in 1998.)


Apparently, even Hans-Ulrich Rudel was eavesdropping on Russian radio while not only performing a sortie, but in middle of a dogfight. With him as role-model, I'd say it is OK do replicate it here.

pourshot
01-13-2006, 01:14 AM
Apparently, even Hans-Ulrich Rudel was eavesdropping on Russian radio while not only performing a sortie, but in middle of a dogfight. With him as role-model, I'd say it is OK do replicate it here.

Did the maps Rudel use have the same grid names as the russians, I think thats un-likely.

Also I think most flights would have keeped silent on things like altitude and the like or it would be in code so just listening would not give the kind of info you could gain by cheating on TS in say a server like WC.

Xiolablu3
01-13-2006, 01:55 AM
I dont htink this should be allowed in game.

If anything should be used then why not get game hacks?, if anything goes then surely they do too?

You have to have some boundaries, part of the fun of the game is having to distinct sides with their own strategy.

Hristo_
01-13-2006, 02:42 AM
For starters, I suggest to reread the thread to recognize a distinction between radio intercept and cheating.

Just because the game is unrealistic regarding same coordinates and gridnames for all sides doesn't imply one should be even less realistic regarding radio usage. Other than that, when it comes to combat and tactical scale, landmarks are usually used. Those are pretty same for all sides.

Different gridnames/coordinates for different sides sounds like a cool idea though. One should bring it before Oleg to give it a thought.

jimDG
01-13-2006, 03:19 AM
Good idea, but not very implementable when it comes to the nuts and bolts.
As already pointed out - general comms for everyone means some people would always use them for endless pointless chatter. In CS one can selectively mute certain players from a list. Have a list of players that can be muted and your immersion and realism goes out the window (then you have to "know" who's talking, it's no longer a dissembodied voice on a radio).
And, no, switching to a different 3 digit code wont work - how would you tell the others without telling the "bad" guy? Besides, how would you know what chanell to go to, when joining the server, if everyone have already moved to their own channels?

Deadmeat313
01-13-2006, 03:34 AM
I think both sides have very good points here €" and Hristo has fought his corner very well. It IS a completely historical feature of WWII warfare. However, I have to side with the nays as regards its implementation in the game.

Imagine if we had a realistic fuel supply system, and late-war only one in four of the blue flyers could actually take off on an online server due to shortages? It would be historical, but would have a decidedly negative effect on the game.

If we had realistic mission flight distances for P-51s and other LR aircraft, many (myself certainly included) would be put off flying those planes.

There may well be some way to implement this in future, but right now there is too much danger that it will put people off using the TS facility. Too few use it as it is.

Sorry Hristo. You arguments are nevertheless very good in this case, and I will from now on try to be careful of how much info I declare on TS. Just in case. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

T.

pourshot
01-13-2006, 04:09 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
For starters, I suggest to reread the thread to recognize a distinction between radio intercept and cheating.

No worrys mate but like I said before, you are allowed your opinion and so am I.

What we have on TS is nothing like real life and to camp on enemy coms to learn exact grid positions and alt is just bad sportsmanship.

Viper2005_
01-13-2006, 04:17 AM
Basically I guess I could sum it up like this. There are too many factors not simulated when playing on Servers or in Coops and therefore should not be allowed for the sake of Gameplay and Fairness.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif


Another point i would like to make as well. Why would a player use a different name on a Voice comms then what he is using in game if he didnt feel like it wasnt a little bit of a cheat? Why not just have both names be the same. Then you COULD be caught and shot like in real life?

I don't think that tuning your radio to a frequency in use by the enemy could reasonably be considered spying under the rules and customs of war.

From the 1907 Hague Convention



CHAPTER II
Spies
Art. 29.

A person can only be considered a spy when, acting clandestinely or on false pretences, he obtains or endeavours to obtain information in the zone of operations of a belligerent, with the intention of communicating it to the hostile party.

Thus, soldiers not wearing a disguise who have penetrated into the zone of operations of the hostile army, for the purpose of obtaining information, are not considered spies. Similarly, the following are not considered spies: Soldiers and civilians, carrying out their mission openly, entrusted with the delivery of despatches intended either for their own army or for the enemy's army. To this class belong likewise persons sent in balloons for the purpose of carrying despatches and, generally, of maintaining communications between the different parts of an army or a territory.
Art. 30.

A spy taken in the act shall not be punished without previous trial.
Art. 31.

A spy who, after rejoining the army to which he belongs, is subsequently captured by the enemy, is treated as a prisoner of war, and incurs no responsibility for his previous acts of espionage.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/hague04.htm

Interestingly enough however, giving a false name is contrary to Article 9.



Art. 9.

Every prisoner of war is bound to give, if he is questioned on the subject, his true name and rank, and if he infringes this rule, he is liable to have the advantages given to prisoners of his class curtailed.

My take on this is that if you catch him you operating under a false name you've got him bang to rights. Otherwise it's legitimate.

BSS_AIJO
01-13-2006, 06:47 AM
Hey,

In game I would avoid listening in on enemy comms. That just seems wrong. Also, the way comms look on warbirds these days there would be no one talking anyways. I have even found myself switching sides so I can be on the side with people on comms.

Humerously a few months ago there were a couple of German guys on comms speaking to each other in German. I though cool, I can listen in and get some much needed practice. They were on the wrong channel though, they didnt bother changeing channels as they thought us dumb americans would not be able to figure out wht they were saying. They were amazed how the formation of bettys kept getting jumped though.

BSS_AIJO

neural_dream
01-13-2006, 07:18 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif