CyBerkut

I should explain my attitude about FFB prior to DCS:BS a bit, I see. What I said earlier, was: That view was not a particularly well-informed view (regarding the FFB disturbing aim), but it was what I was thinking. Hence, no interest in spending the money to buy an FFB stick. As such, I had no experience with it back then. Also, it should be noted that back in that time period, most of my 'sim' style gaming was in MechWarrior 4. In MW4, your aim is getting knocked around (on the screen) when you are taking hits from the enemy, especially when you are in close range brawls. In MW4, kills are a matter of attrition. You have to wear down the armor, which is divided up in zones. So, to achieve the most efficient kills, you generally want to target the armor section that is most depleted, (One shot kills are rare, and involve hitting the cockpit, which is a *small* target). It is hard enough to do that while your targeting reticule / view on the screen is bouncing around from hits on your mech, without having your stick exerting forces upon your hand. It was not my intent for anyone to take my earlier statement as a summation of how FFB worked in other flight sims. I can see how folks would though, since this is a flight sim forum. :) My apologies for being less than fully clear on that. The gist of what I was getting at though, is that the FFB trim function in DCS:BS made FFB interesting to me, where it wasn't an item I desired to have before.

Some of that was stunning!

That's an interesting idea. Please let us know if you pull that off! :) I like the sounds of that! :thumbup:

Gadroc, what you're doing with this, rawks!:punk: I know you have it on your "To do" list to add network functionality where this could be used in a server - client manner. Obviously, the client machines would not have the ABRIS or Shkval displays, but being able to divide the controls up between multiple client touch screens could really open up some nice glass cockpit possibilities. Kudos to both you and Dick Dastardly!!!

His statement about not needing a touchscreen is the same one that you see used when TouchBuddy is being talked about. You don't 'need' a touchscreen for it to work, in that you could use your mouse to click upon the buttons. Obviously, having a touchscreen where you actually touch the buttons with your finger would be much more desirable. The nice thing about the option of using a mouse, is that you can install the software and test it before going out and dropping your money on a touchscreen (or overlay).

Until DCS:BS came along, I had avoided FFB like the plague. I had no interest in having the stick fighting me while trying to aim (I'm poor enough without the stick adding to my woes...). The DCS:BS trim changed that, as FFB became something helpful.

Interesting! That doc appears to be for the A-10A, but it seems reasonable that the same scheme would be retained in the A-10C. As for how E.D. would implement it in DCS:A-10C... Hmmm... Just imagining here, but it would seem there could still be benefit to having an FFB controller for a simulation of that trim system, but that it would be less of an impact upon the experience than it is in Black Shark. Having only thought about it a little bit, it would appear that the whole 're-center the stick' thing would be inapplicable. Can anyone confirm the A-10C's trim works the same way? If so, I would think that for folks who really want to use an FS controller for DCS:A-10C, that it would be a pretty manageable adaptation. For DCS:BS though... FFB is the way to go.

For DCS:BS, (which is the poll question), FFB is the logical choice, if you seek to simulate/emulate how it works in the Ka-50. The Ka-50's cyclic moves, and it holds position when trimmed. FFB (properly implemented) can simulate the trim position holding of the cyclic. FFB rudder pedals could do the same for Ka-50's pedals. Could a non-moving (or slightly moving) Force Sensing stick be easier? I suppose it could be argued that it could be easier than a conventional stick, since re-centering the stick after releasing the trim button would be a shorter trip. Would a FS be easier than a properly implemented FFB? With the possible exception of a few who are already highly accustomed to their FS stick, I don't see how it would be easier. With FS, you still have to use one of the work-around implementations of trimming that E.D. came up with for non-FFB users. As for the upcoming DCS:A-10C (which was not the focus of the poll question), that will depend on, at least in part, on how trim is implemented in it.

Ah, good to know! Thanks!

A clarification may be in order. I was talking about Force Feedback (ala Logitech G940 / MS Sidewinder FFB2 / Saitek Evo Force) as opposed to Force Sensing (ala Saitek's upcoming X65F / FSSB modded TM Cougar). I wouldn't expect a real A-10 to use FFB in its stick, as FFB is something used in game/sim controllers. For DCS:BS, FFB is useful for holding the trimmed position of the cyclic (and could be used on rudder pedals, too). I don't know enough about how the A-10C's trim works. If it is similar to the Black Shark's trim, then a properly implemented FFB would be nice to have in Thrustmaster's upcoming controller. I'm not going to be holding my breath over it. ( Though I imagine some folks wish I would! ;) ). As far as I know, the real A-10C's stick is not Force Sensing either. It is a center mounted stick. AFAIK, the Force Sensing (tensiometric) is only used on side mounted sticks (F-16 / F-22 / F-35).

Happy Birthday, Acedy! :beer: Try to enjoy your 'retirement' (from moderating). Keeping us all in line is practically a full-time job in itself, eh? ;)

Hmmm... I suppose it's too much to hope that it would be an FFB (done right) stick. Still, with the MFD (button rings) and this, it looks like TM is serious about competing. Always a good thing! :thumbup:

Yes. With FFB trim, the cyclic will remain in the trimmed position.

Yeah, what he said! :thumbup:

Now THERE's an image I'm not going to be able to get rid of soon... :helpsmilie:

Wags, since you are planning on producing videos, are you going with just one monitor, or are you looking to go multi-monitor?

FWIW, keep in mind that DCS:BS has a config file that has FFB related settings: ...\Eagle Dynamincs\Ka-50\Config\Contactor.cfg TrimmerGain = 1.0; ShakeGain = 0.5; SwapForceAxes = 0; MinForce = 0.7; MinForceIAS = 85.0; MaxForce = 1.0; MaxForceIAS = 250.0; There might be something useful in there...

That's a whole list of displays, there. Many of them appear to be TV displays (ATSC/NTSC/PAL inputs), without a VGA input. There are some VGA input displays on there, many (if not all) of them touchscreens. That 15 Inch Touchscreen LCD with VGA, http://www.chinavasion.com/product_info.php/pName/15-inch-touchscreen-lcd-with-vga/ looks like it would be really nice for TouchBuddy!

Ohhh? I think I still have that software in the box. What is the last Win OS version that folks can get MW3 to run on? I know some folks who might like to fire that up again...

That appears to be from the FAQ for MechWarrior: Living Legends. That's a mod being developed for the Crysis game engine. Different can of beans, from MechWarror: Rebooted (or just MechWarrior, perhaps). MW:LL looks interesting, if they manage to pull it off. I keep hearing conflicting info on their progress though. Any ways, maybe it will give Wasp something fun to use his killer pit for, sooner rather than later !!!

OK, the above was posted before working up to Kirai's preceding post. I guess I need to go take a look!

"MechWarrior: Rebooted" is the title they intend, as I understand it. I believe that Harmony Gold, (Robotech / Macross) claim the Warhammer is a rip off of one of their designs. There may be other items of contention as well. When Weisman (Smith & Tinker) put that promo out, they did it in an attempt to line up a publisher. So far, I'm not aware of any official announcement that they have got one yet... so even if HG's suit isn't stopping the development in total cold, S & T may not be making any progress on it any ways. Besides, it appears that Weisman / S & T are currently focused on their Nanovor project. It doesn't sound too promising to me, so far.

Wasp, that is looking impressive!!! Now, if we could only get a new mech game / sim for the PC...

Ummm... huh? I may be misunderstanding you, but I think you may have an incorrect idea about how to use the SST software. The SST .pro file you created will control how your AV8R controller affects the game. No lua file creation necessary. You just load the .pro file you created in your Saitek SST Profiler (not to be confused with the Profile Editor), that you run simultaneously with the sim. Once you get that part working, one other suggestion... you may encounter problems with the axis control if you are using the SST profile to designate what axis does what. I suggest you designate the axis controls in DCS:BS options | Axis controls, while using the SST software to designate whatthe buttons/hats etc. do. Does that make sense to you?

Shopper.com http://shopper.cnet.com/personal-care/fine-rib-corrugated-rubber/4414-19394_9-733655096.html Rubber-Cal http://www.rubbercal.com/Corrugated_Fine_Rib.html Lots of hits via Google searching. Suggested search: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft%3A*%3AIE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7ADBR_en&q=Automotive+Floor+Mat+Fine+Rib+Corrugated&aq=f&oq=&aqi= Good luck!