Steering/braking: Current, simplified behaviour or realistic?

[Skulleader]

For me the answer is easy, I'm a great passionate by DCSW because all their addons or modules are very realists and very perfect like the A-10C, Mi-8, Huey, P-51, KA-50 and FW-190.

The Mig-21bis is for me the must to have for any passionate of flight simulation...

So I want the best and I've got the best with DCSW, if the Mig-21bis can be more and more realist it's not one problem because I'm fall in love of this module.

The goal of this simulation is to obtain the best and the most real simulation and with all these modules for me the dream come true +1

 

[effte]

Voted 'yes', as I think it would be misinterpreted if I voted 'no', as in 'I only want it correctly implemented, leave the fudged version for game mode'.

 

In fact, the current implementation makes the aircraft difficult to control on the ground if you actually use the controls as intended. You turn the pedals and then modulate the brakes to get the turn rate you want - but then you have to back off the pedals to avoid having the fake NWS turn your aircraft too much! This means you have to modulate the pedals with the braking, to avoid symmetrical braking.

 

The faux NWS has to go, and soon.

 

As for the fellow above who wants to use the pinky switch "for authenticity"? You're replacing an analog lever activated with several fingers for a pinky activated digital button. And this in the name of authenticity, as the button is in roughly the same place in the cockpit?! Well, to each his own...

 

Cheers,

/Fred

[ff4life4]

I have been using a dial on the x52 for braking, and it works nicely. I really hope they remove this artificial stuff

[statrekmike]

I voted yes but only because I think that it would be good to have that option down the road, when they have finished ironing out the bugs we have now and are able to devote some time to it without it being at the expense of (to be blunt) far more pressing issues.

 

Also, to be really honest here, it's current implementation is not the end of the world, I think having a more realistic implementation should be a option but the current setup should not be arbitrarily moved to "game mode" because while some of use have a axis to spare, others don't, should they be stuck with either game mode or poor ground handling?

 

Not everyone has the same controls setups, it is probably a good idea to keep that in mind.

[[DBS]TH0R]

No offense, but am I the only one who doesn't understand what is "extremely complex" about Mig-21's realistic steering? Its not like you need rudder pedals with toe brakes to get the max out of it (e.g. DCS P-51 and Fw-190). Much like in IL21946, it comes down to press "brake" and point the rudder in the direction you wish to steer. With nose breaking disabled of course.

 

Realistic breaking 200%.

[ff4life4]

I don't think the artifical steering has to be in "game mode" only.

 

Simply make it an option in the special options menu, similar to takeoff assistance

[MBot]

No offense, but am I the only one who doesn't understand what is "extremely complex" about Mig-21's realistic steering? Its not like you need rudder pedals with toe brakes to get the max out of it (e.g. DCS P-51 and Fw-190). Much like in IL21946, it comes down to press "brake" and point the rudder in the direction you wish to steer. With nose breaking disabled of course.

 

Realistic breaking 200%.

 

Imagine the following situation: You do not have the breakes assigned to an axis. You are taxing along a straght taxiway with a steady wind comming from the side. In order to to steer against the wind and keep aligned on the centerline, you have to constantly apply breaking pressure to retain your ability to steer. If you have assigned your breakes on a button, this means you will be sitting on full breakes all the time. Quite acquard to keep to keep taxi this way.

[statrekmike]

No offense, but am I the only one who doesn't understand what is "extremely complex" about Mig-21's realistic steering? Its not like you need rudder pedals with toe brakes to get the max out of it (e.g. DCS P-51 and Fw-190). Much like in IL21946, it comes down to press "brake" and point the rudder in the direction you wish to steer. With nose breaking disabled of course.

 

Realistic breaking 200%.

 

 

It is not that it is too complex, it is simply that not everyone has the axis control to spare for the brakes and without the gradual braking you can get from having your brakes assigned to a axis, the MiG becomes more than a little bit difficult and annoying to handle on the ground.

 

I have a axis to spare for it, you clearly have a axis to spare for it but not everyone does, do they have to play in game-mode for tolerable ground handling?

 

Putting the current system into game-mode only is outright silly, adding a option in the same way the Mustang has a take-off assistance slider is the best way to do it, unless you think that the Mustang's take-off assistance should be in game-mode only as well.

[[DBS]TH0R]

I stand corrected then. Wouldn't tapping the brakes help?

[Viersbovsky]

This should be an option. As said, some people have no toe-brakes or other axis left for the brakes (X-52 and no pedals users like me) so steering without assistance becomes rather dicey. Yet, this should not be to the detritment of people with the neccessary equipment who want full realism.

Just make it an option like take off assistance and auto-rudder.

[anjet]

yes

[JG-1_Vogel]

I would like the option personally. I'm flying with an old cougar and Saitek pedals (all falling to bits) and use the lever on the front of my cougar as the brakes like in the MiG 'pit and it's quite easy once you get used to it. You just have to anticipate where you're going instead of relying on the instant response you get from the FC3 aircraft and the A-10C.

 

Even if you don't have rudders etc, it's still easy. Just use the X and C keys I believe those are the left/right rudder keys and just apply the brake as appropriate.

[Art-J]

Well, I don't own rudder pedals - use racing ones instead, which means analog rudder, but no analog differential brake axes for me. Yet, I manage taxying in P-51 (unlocked tailwheel mode) and Fw-190 reasonably well by tapping hat switch assigned to the brakes. Sure, my turns are not round'n smooth, but the job gets done. It would be the same with MiG I'm sure.

 

"Realistic brakes" as an option, separate from sim/game mode, sounds like an idea which would make everyone happy.

[Vibora]

I'm not voting in the poll because the question is unclear.

I want to see realistic steering added.

[Corrigan]

I'm not voting in the poll because the question is unclear.

I want to see realistic steering added.

 

Do you really think so? The poll asks

Do you want a Realistic/Simplified Steering option?

 

The very first line of the OP is

To clarify, the question this poll poses is "Do you want an entry in the Special options menu which allows us to turn on a more realistic method of steering the aircraft?"

[Vibora]

I want it realistic and without the option. You can't have options for everything. Another thing is if simplified steering is included in Easy Flight option.

[Vibora]

Hope it was not your intention Corrigan, your words sound a bit insulting to me. Everyone has right to give his opinion, and you should respect it.

It's not so hard to taxi a Russian airplane, after some time anyone can do it, even in a sim with a keyboard wouldn't be so hard. Also, it's something so specific to Russian airplanes that anyone who wants to fly it should pass through it. It's all my personal opinion, which I decided to share in this thread, as well as is my decision not to answer that poll for the said reasons.

[Art-J]

If You could get off Your high horse and actually bothered to read a few last pages of this thread, You would understand why Corrigan replied as he did and why the aforementioned option is a reasonable idea - PC hardware limitations are an important factor to consider. I want realistic mechanics and I think I can deal with differential braking by tapping the keys/buttons and whatnot, however, I understand where supporters of the option idea come from.

[Tango]

@Corrigan: I see Vibora's point - it's a relatively small detail, and given that it is a feature of this and other aircraft (and don't get me started on tail draggers or helicopters...) that it is silly to "dumb down" a behavior such as this because people find it "extremely complex". Link

 

If that is really the case, those people should find another game, or see it as a challenge and learn how to do it properly. It takes practise, sure, but then the MiG is not exactly a walk in the park to fly anyway.

 

It's not that the MiG will even wander - it will track in straight line if you leave the controls alone. I wonder how many of those people have the P-51D?

 

Best regards,

Tango.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Tango

[Corrigan]

@Vibora: I meant no insult. I suggest that you ask yourself whether you'd prefer an option between the two, or only the simplified. Those are the only two scenarios I think are realistically on the table.

 

@Tango: I know, and if I developed the module I probably would have left the realistic version in, and pointed the people complaining to the literature (for better and worse!). However, here we are. I'm sure you can see why I've chosen to ask for an option rather than having them change it for everyone.

[Tango]

I'm sure you can see why I've chosen to ask for an option rather than having them change it for everyone.

Yes. I voted Yes, if you're wondering. :)

 

Best regards,

Tango.

[lmp]

I wonder how many of those people have the P-51D?

 

It's interesting that you mention the P-51D, cause it does have a take off assist slider and auto rudder option. It is in essence the same thing - a feature for those without the hardware or the agility or the time to master the aircraft in "max realism mode". I don't own the Dora, so I can't say if it has something similar, but the F-86F has the option to automatically rise the seat for better visibility during landing, and the Mi-8 has a control helper option. So it's not uncommon for DCS aircraft to have such features outside of the regular difficulty settings.

 

Frankly I don't get the "set it to max realism or go find another game" attitude. Do we need to be so elitist? I don't think so.

 

Simplified taxiing is already in the game. Resources for its development were already spent. I don't see a reason to throw it out. Let the people who want it have the option to use it. For the rest of us, a realistic option would be great.

[Tango]

Frankly I don't get the "set it to max realism or go find another game" attitude. Do we need to be so elitist? I don't think so.

My only concern is that in the case of the MiG, they opted for simplified without the ability for a realistic mode, because of feedback from casual gamers.

 

Too many sims are already over-simplified or lacking depth to cater "for the masses" and DCS is refreshing in that it has exceptional realism whilst allowing those who want easier to have it as well.

 

I'm sure LN will get this fixed, but it is the presumption that it is OK to make a function less realistic/"gamey" without the realistic option being made available that is the problem.

 

DCS is a highly realistic simulator, first and foremost. The ability for DCS to be a "study sim" should not be lost.

 

Best regards,

Tango.

[Eldur]

I wonder how many of those people have the P-51D?

 

Probably none. And they also don't have Il-2 BoS. Taxiing there is an absolute nightmare without toe brakes. I even temporarily stopped flying this because it's so awful. A realistically modelled MiG-21 taxiing would be piece of cake compared to that.

 

My only concern is that in the case of the MiG, they opted for simplified without the ability for a realistic mode, because of feedback from casual gamers.

 

I'd really like to see this. I've been reading nearly every post in this LNS forum for ~2 months now and I haven't seen a single post of anyone who wants simplified taxi controls. Where is that feedback? Sources anyone? :)

[Corrigan]

LN were referring to internal tests. It's also important to keep in mind that the people who bother visiting the forums aren't representative of the total set of MiG owners in all aspects.