How many of these people will keep their promises?

As promised here are my pros & cons of Discord v TeamSpeak3.

Discord's Pros:

1. Stable environment, not based on an NFO server, and their server farms are secured from DDOS attacks of a wide variety.

2. Easy user interface, its all very clean, options are easy to look into and make changes.

3. VOIP Quality - their audio codec is superior to even the best TS3 offers, simple.

4. Text Chat Channels - you can setup different channels, and even restrict some chat & voice channels to member permissions based on member type. Also pictures directly show up in chat as do youtube and some embedded videos.

5. System Performance Hit - TeamSpeak 3 takes up an additional 8% CPU usage on my system (FX8350 8 core CPU @ 4.4 GHZ), and Discord only uses an additional 128 mb of RAM on my system over TeamSpeak. Overall Discord wins the performance game, it uses less critical resources as having 16 GB of RAM means that 128 mb of RAM is nothing to me, in fact Google Chrome eats up way more than that. CPU power however is a different performance story in all, as that is harder to maintain, and TS3 requires more than Discord.

6. Cost - TeamSpeak 3 at our current costs according to Scriv is around 40 USD ANNUALLY. Discord costs us 0, yes 0 USD annually, its free.

7. Admin Controls - some of TeamSpeak3's admin controls are archaic and clunky to say the least, and can take time to get setup properly. Discord's admin UI is entirely different and is extremely easy to use, the Discord server was setup by 2 people (Iceman14555 & myself) we were able to almost exactly mirror the =SWF= TeamSpeak3 server with admin permissions in a few hours.

8. Privacy - servers are based on an INVITE system, much less chance of dealing with random jackasses looking to troll servers.

9. Auto AFK - YEP, we have that feature already in place, after 60 minutes of inactivity (adjustable) the server bot will automatically move you to the AFK channel, no more manual moving patrons around that are AFK!

10. Constant development and improvements - Yes TS3 still updates, however the content in them, and features they still lack cost them this pro. Discord has a whole slew of new content coming soon in updates, many of which are in TS3, such as a private file storage system, and additional FORUM LINKING TOOLS. I am not joking, some RSS forums like our own will be able to directly link to our Discord allowing members to post from Discord to the Forums, and see new posts from the Forums, Scriv this should excite you.


Cons:

1. No current file storage system like in TS3

2. When the Discord servers go down for maintenance/upgrade/outage ALL Discord servers on that farm go down.

3. No ACRE / TFAR plugins available at this time (the mod teams are working on it).


Final Verdict -

Discord is what TeamSpeak3 wants to be when it grows a pair, that pair drop, and it becomes a man. The biggest issue for Discord right now is when there is an outage all of their servers go down. They have plans to rectify this by using multiple farms per region so when one goes down the service transfers to another.

DISCORD WINS HANDILY.

Frasberry's recruit from TheHunter of all places, welcome!

For those of you unaware Tink has served in combat tours overseas as a Combat Engineer in the US Army, another military member for the clan.

Will prepare a list of pro v con for the discussion of Discord v TeamSpeak3.

For the record, I did not initiate the project, I did assist Iceman with it, in making sure it was as identical as possible to ensure continuity. I also like Discord personally, and many other groups that I would normally have contacted using TeamSpeak 3 have since shut down their TS3 servers and moved entirely to Discord as its literally free.

The sever can also always be shut down if necessary at no cost to any party.

I just watched it, I liked his video, he makes a very good assessment, many many points that I agree on.

I will say this right now, I HATE BATTLEFIELD 4 STANDARD (NON-HARDCORE) MODE. However I LIKE Battlefield 4 HARDCORE mode. I did not say I loved it, but that I liked it, and I think that if standard Battlefield was like Hardcore mode, with the larger maps as an emphasis, it would appeal much more to you Scriv and the rest of the clan.


Now Battlefield 1 Standard I can TOLERATE, I do not like it, I certainly do not love it, but I can tolerate it to a point. It remains to be seen what it will be like with Hardcore mode, and some have hinted that Hardcore mode may not even come to BF1 which would mean I am not interested in purchasing the game. This was just a rumor, one not founded on anything but hearsay, so I take it worth a grain of salt.

Yes I did say that if HC mode was not implemented in BF1 that I will flat out refuse to purchase the game, and I intend to keep to that just like I kept my word in regards to that bastard of a game called Hardline (its not even deserving of the Battlefield tag, its not a Battlefield game to me, its just Hardline).

As I have said before their decision to do a DLC type of content for the French Troops which took a major brunt of the force in WWI, is just freaking stupid and distasteful, however I usually purchase the Premium version of BF if I purchase the game so I get the full benefit and it allows me to get the whole picture and write the most honest review I can.

Nightshade, Iceman, and myself the other night all played Verdun, and we had some fun, and Verdun has its moments. 2 things are easily clear and these also directly carry over to Battlefield 1 in a gameplay sense.

1. If the map sucks, the game sucks, simple. IN the case of the BF1 Open BETA, the Sinai Desert map is MEH.

2. If your team sucks, your experience is going to be fraught with nothing other than frustration and depression, same directly goes for BF1.


It remains to be seen how the other maps on BF1 will play like, and what they would play like in Hardcore mode, to that extent I have no information to base a review on.

They need an appropriate scope for that M110 SASS though....

Yes the game can be played without an internet connection, just not the BETA. Battlelog is a thing of the past, its all built into the UI like it should have been with BF3 and BF4.

Sever admins get server logs of all input and actions to send out to PBBANS, FairFight, and Battleye if needed, this is in BF4 and its effective. Its not in the BETA as all BETA servers are EA/DICE official.

Yes the other players based on their options they selected in the gameplay menu can hear your requests for ammo/medic in their native tongue or in the characters native tongue as they wish.

Yes anyone can talk with anyone, there is squad, team, and global chat. Many people do not use in game VOIP as they use either Discord, TeamSpeak, or Skype.

The squad ordering system is more basic than BF2, but its still there. I was not able to observe placing custom waypoints on a map during the BETA, unknown if it will be in release.

The SL can promote someone else in the squad to SL at any time they wish. Anyone can mute or report anyone for abuse/infractions at their leisure.

Its an Assault/Medic class that can be played either or a mix of the two.

default (non-hardcore) has 3D spotting and killcam. I DO NOT PLAY DEFAULT IN BF4 NOR WOULD I PLAY IT WHEN BF1 RELEASED, I ONLY PLAY HARDCORE, & THERE ARE PLENTY OF EXCELLENT SERVERS AVAILABLE EVEN NOW IN BF4.

Yes you can hear your character yell orders, comments, ect...

Not sure if that will be controlled server side as BF4 had TONS of server options available and I never had an issue with that. I did not see a player side option for that in the menu but I would understand if that was a server side option only for balance.

I understand that petitions have little to no effect on EA/DICE, even if they garner mass attraction and support, its just something I am throwing out there, not holding my breath. Kind of like when people try to get me to play DayZ and they petition me to play it.

Sinai Desert does seem small yes, I was not saying it was big, what I was saying was there are maps on BF4 that are 3km x 3km, including Dragon Valley 2015 which was faithfully reproduced and is fantastic as Frasberry can tell you, still wish Operation Harvest and Highway Tampa were faithfully reproduced.

Yes I am still making my decision on BF1, I was extremely critical of the E3 video as were many other anti-battlefield people. However upon playing its not as bad as I perceived it to be. As Iceman has said, if you look at the game from an alternate history standpoint in an action game its not bad at all, if you look at it for realism like Verdun its total shit.

BTW comparing BF1 to Verdun is like comparing Team Fortress 2 to ArmA III.

Most of what you reported on is from BF3 or BFBC2.

No modding is still there, its their stupid choice, but it would not stop me from purchasing.

LAN ability is there, you can setup a local server, just not in the BETA, which makes sense, they are tracking feedback (if they do much with the data).

Battle Recorder is something of the past, now with NVIDIA Shadowplay, or Twitch, ect... they have little need for that, for servers with active admins (and there are still plenty even in BF4) bans come quickly if needed.

CommoRose is in BF1, hold Q and you get a wheel based selection menu.

Integrated VIOP is in BF1, not many use it as many use Discord, TeamSpeak 3, or Skype. Many popular servers even have their own Battlefield TeamSpeak servers that will detect your name in game and move you to the appropriate channels, done this personally many times.

As for the order system, its there in BF1, and you get a good bit of bonus points for completing the order. Not many people follow my orders in BF4 as commander, not sure what the deal is there.

Unknown if commander will be returning in BF1, I hope so, I liked it.

Squad Management is in BF1, you can promote, or kick members. Your squad can spawn on you as SL, and as SL you can spawn on any squad member, but members can only spawn on you.

Yes the 4 classes still exist, personally I would like to see 0 classes and use a point and inventory based system to make your own class, this could balance well but on with facts in BF1.

Medic is in BF1, it is an assault/medic but you do start out with a syringe (AED in modern games), and medpacks.

As stated above the classes all start with basic default equipment, there are upgrades that are better at some things and worse at others, equipment is not entirely an issue for me.

In non-hardcore games 3D spotting is still there, I like to play only hardcore as it gives that classic battlefield feel, also in HC mode there is no kill cam.

I hate scope glint, not sure if they will reduce the penalty in HC, in other BF games they have, so that remains to be seen.

Yes you can still hear characters talking when they shout, I like this, it makes it more intense for both, I get the drawback but its not game breaking for me, it adds immersion IMHO. Yes everyone hears the yelling.

The physics in BF1 are pretty good, the vehicles are way too fast for WWI, they drive like WWII+ vehicles and I am not sure if HC mode will be like this, it likely will, I am making a petition (for what little its worth) to add an HC Realism mode that makes the vehicles handle more realistically.

The only map I have played thus far is Sinai Desert, its a 1.5km x 1.5km map air wise and about a 1.1km x 1.1km map land wise. Most of the battles occurr withing 1/2 that distance, and the flags are usually 200-250m apart, aside from Echo point, which is 500m away. Some BF4 maps were small like Zavod which I hate, but some are quite large and the land battle area encompassed 1.5km easy with people making 1.4km sniper shots doing counter sniping (this was in BF4, NOT BF1). So I am quite confident that maps like that will be in BF1 as they were very popular in BF4.

Is BF1 a perfect battlefield game that lives up to the timeless classics like 1942 or BF2? No, its not, but its not terrible either, I am still making my decision, but I have had some good fun in BF4 with Frasberry, Iceman, Viper, and even NME Auscam. BTW Auscam says hello.

I posted that based on the E3 video with little to no game time.

I LOVE Verdun, it is a tactical masterpiece that is historically accurate, however its not for everyone.

I have been playing the OPEN BETA of Battlefield 1, and here are my official thoughts on it.

1. THIS DOES NOT FEEL LIKE BATTLEFIELD 1942 OR BATTLEFIELD 2.

2. Its feels like a mix of Battlefield 4 and Bad Company 2.

3. I very much dislike standard conquest, I prefer hardcore.

4. Many of the firearms and some of the equipment in BF1 were never used or adopted, many are just extreme prototypes that had less than 1000 copies made ever.

5. When 2 good teams are fighting and you are playing with friends and people play their roles, BF1 even in standard conquest is a blast.

6. When your team flat sucks and no one plays their role, BF1 is entirely aggravating to the point where you consider not pre-ordering or thinking of a refund.

7. The ranking system hearkens somewhat back to BF2, however it is NOT exactly like it. Per rank promotion there are 10 other promotions required.
Ex....
Private
Private 1
Private 2
Private 3
ect..
Corporal 1

Now scriv would ask "Why not just make it private to corporal with the same exp as the 1-10 sub ranks?"

A good question, however many people may get discouraged at not seeing some kind of progress or small progress made. This gives the best of both worlds and I understand the design concept here.

8. NO MORE BATTLELOG!!!! I love this, they got rid of that battlelog shit, its all in game, and through Battlefield.com IF you wish to do so, you do NOT need to go to Battlefield.com if you do not want to.

9. Like all other Battlefield games they have dedicated player servers with an in-game server browser, I am not praising this as much as I expect it to be there, if they did not have this, I would instantly shun this game even if the rest of it were perfect, but that's me.

10. The graphics are fan-****ing-tastic and so are the sounds, but DICE has always been excellent with that, especially since the Bad Company days.

11. Battlefield 1 with Hardcore mode on 64 player conquest maps would be a good bit of fun.

12. Unlocking new firearms per class if attained by playing that class only, through capturing points, getting kills/assists, and playing your role ex.. medic, support (ammo), ect.... In the BETA this was communicated to the player VERY POORLY, and I pray this will not carry over to the final release.

13. Hackers do exist even in this BETA, however it seems their "fairfight" anti-hack seems to be banning a good portion of the them. When the full release comes out there will be dedicated player ranked servers that will utilize battleye and fairfight, plus admin control, so I am confident hackers will be punished accordingly on well maintained servers.

14. I am enjoying the BETA, and I am considering a purchase. I do NOT like EA's way of "premium this game to get everything" including stuff that should be in the game right off the bat, like FRENCH TROOPS.
I would have understood if the Ottoman Empire was a DLC, not many know about the battles the Ottoman Empire had in WWI, would have made more sense, than a French DLC, ****ing stupid.


15. Final point, and this agitates the **** out of me... When people request ammo or medical supplies it does a TERRIBLE job at letting others near them know their team needs supplies! When you are KIA and waiting for a revive you get like 8 or 10 seconds to be revived, which is not terrible, but it has NO SOLID COMMUNICATIVE WAY for medics to see that someone needs a revive, its NOT like BF4 where there was a pulse insignia, I play medic A LOT, and I can not find ANY indication of something like this, even Iceman could not. Then they allow people to call for a medic once needing a revive, I could not get people to revive me even with that, in BF4 that was usually not an issue. This mechanic needs VAST improvement in the release version or I may not purchase the game, its that game breaking.

End of my Battlefield 1 review, comments or concerns appreciated.