Why so many keys for one action?

[FSKRipper]

Don't think so. I use also a three way switch. There are still 3 steps to make and no script is doing the work for you. In the case of radar i simply use the mouse. So your argument works at maximum for the gear lever.

[jaydee]

I don't know how anyone can argue that "canopy open" and "canopy close" should be 2 separate commands .

 

In general I think the commands should be condensed some

And If I may add Angst,Canopy Open/close should be the same Keystroke for every Aircraft in the DCS series.

I think the whole DCS Controls/Input needs an overhaul.

As a new guy to DCS, why do I have to Scour the Forums to find out why Rudders are operating the Throttle from the getgo ?

Some people say 10 mins to program a Plane !.. Maybe they have been using this menu for Ten Years ?

Some say "you can Edit the Lua File".....What is a Lua file for a newcomer ?

Learning to fly an Accurate Representation of an Aircraft is why I love DCS !

The Controls/Input menu is a Nightmare for me...

BTW, Happy new Year to all ! ~S~

[zaelu]

And If I may add Angst,Canopy Open/close should be the same Keystroke for every Aircraft in the DCS series.

I think the whole DCS Controls/Input needs an overhaul.

As a new guy to DCS, why do I have to Scour the Forums to find out why Rudders are operating the Throttle from the getgo ?

Some people say 10 mins to program a Plane !.. Maybe they have been using this menu for Ten Years ?

Some say "you can Edit the Lua File".....What is a Lua file for a newcomer ?

Learning to fly an Accurate Representation of an Aircraft is why I love DCS !

The Controls/Input menu is a Nightmare for me...

BTW, Happy new Year to all ! ~S~

 

 

Yes, standardized controls should be the norm on all planes of DCS. No need for further complications by using personal preferences of X or Y developer. Like Kneeboard put on Rctrl+Arrows etc.

 

About the Rudder moving the throttles, this is quite easy to explain. The developers can't test all the hardware in the world and then create individual profiles for each and every joystick and even then to have bugs to correct or failures to work out... So they create a principal controller profile and for each joystick or controller detected the default axis and buttons are assigned from that single profile. It's annoying but there is no alternative way that is economic. You can use clear category button to mass clear controls and axis.

 

Learning to fly an accurate representation of an aircraft and not having nightmares about configuring buttons and more often learning where and why they are scattered around the cockpit is just a dream IMHO. Mig21Bis is not really hard to configure as it is to find the controls in the pit t the beginning.

 

I use these menus for ten years and yes it take me under 10 minutes to configure the controls on a new plane... but this is just like an anecdote... if you stay calm and look a bit at the controls and their function and their grouping you start to build a picture of them... you can't expect to instant understand such... "sweet mess"... immediately.

 

Try to imagine a better way of configuring the interface... I proposed once removing the drop down menus and replacing them with buttons around the screen like in the MFDs...

 

Maybe some schematic pictures of the controls/cokpits would be also good...

[Kuky]

I really can't understand why some complan when they get realistic aircraft like this, everyone is crying for more realism and swear by it, but when you give them exactly that some complain. Also don't compare "other" aircraft with MIG-21, they are not the same aircraft and do not operate the same... just learn how to use it. It's not that hard.

[MTFDarkEagle]

I really can't understand why some complan when they get realistic aircraft like this, everyone is crying for more realism and swear by it, but when you give them exactly that some complain. Also don't compare "other" aircraft with MIG-21, they are not the same aircraft and do not operate the same... just learn how to use it. It's not that hard.

^THIS

[FSKRipper]

I really can't understand why some complan when they get realistic aircraft like this, everyone is crying for more realism and swear by it, but when you give them exactly that some complain. Also don't compare "other" aircraft with MIG-21, they are not the same aircraft and do not operate the same... just learn how to use it. It's not that hard.

 

You speak out of my soul sir! :thumbup:

[GriffonBR]

Pff my topic is gone...:doh:

 

Well, the point it's not realism, I just came here to ask about the possibilities to merge some cockpit actions for one button only.

Some guys only came here to flame the topic as always, but never mind, I got the point and you guys can close this discussion if you want.

It´s not about the aircraft itself, it's about the game inputs that could be more easily to configure like the other "click click" modules.

[Flagrum]

I really can't understand why some complan when they get realistic aircraft like this, everyone is crying for more realism and swear by it, but when you give them exactly that some complain. Also don't compare "other" aircraft with MIG-21, they are not the same aircraft and do not operate the same... just learn how to use it. It's not that hard.

 

It is NOT "realistic" if 1/3 of my available buttons/switches are necessary to just operate the landing gear. It is NOT realistic if the remaining buttons have to be divided into "function X" and "open safety cap for function X".

 

"Oh, a missile! Better I fire some flares now!"

*button-push*

*button-push*

*button-push*

"...w? wait! something is amiss here ... no sound of flares popping?"

*BANG*

*realistic death by missile hit ... or rather, by failing to open a friggin plastic cap*

 

:doh:

 

Guys, why can't we try to find a decent solution? Nobody wants "macros" that do everything for you. Nobody ... ok, seemingly a few ... wants to map every single piece of plastic or metal that is not bolted or glued to the fuselage to a separate button. So why can't we just identify the cases where it makes sense to take flightsimmers reality into account and make things a bit less awkward? And/or cases where it won't hurt anybody's feelings if others use less buttons than I? The MiG-21 will not turn into a Uber 6th gen figher if we can raise the gear with only 2 instead of 3 or 4 buttons - so no worries that all others have to deal with huge disadvantages ...

Edited December 31, 2014 by Flagrum

[xracer]

I you think about it, its not much of a problem. There is the landing gear and the canopy which mostly needs a few extra pushes, but they are used once or twice on a mission and shouldnt be wasted stickbuttons for. The Mig-21Bis has this neutral position on the landing gear which is different which adds a little, but thats the way its designed so its fine for me. Things i do worry about is if there is too many actions needed to be done quickly to not mess up gameplay, but its not a problem here. Like mentioned above about shot down cause of not being able to activate countermeasures fast enough could be solved by combat checklists to uncap stuff beforehand and general planning i think. But for those who want it simpler for gameplays sake, learn the HOTAS programming, its not that hard. The sim is fantastic and the Leatherneck team has done a superjob!

[Flagrum]

So, no options, no choice, no tollerance for us weaklings, eh? Just press RCTRL+LWIN+9 and then RALT+LSHIFT+% and you have opened the cap! Now only CTRL+ALT+DEL and voila! your gear retracts - realistically! And not even one HOTAS button wasted!

 

The countermeasure example was btw not about being to slow. It was rather about the fact that in the real machine you would not have to waste a single thought on wether or not the cap is open or not. When you reach out to press the button, you would feel the cap and open it within a blink of an eye. It would be one single, smooth movement. But we have two separate, distinct actions to perform - without the help of any tactile feedback.

 

Of for all these examples some sort of solution exists - even I can retract the landing gear sucessfully! Even I am able to fire flares! But still I would prefer an out-of-the-box solution that is a tiny bit more userfriendly. And I can not understand how anyone can be against that. If you don't see the necessity - fine. But why is everyone arguing AGAINST it? As if you would lose something then?

Edited December 31, 2014 by Flagrum

[zaelu]

Some of the buttons actually work even when the cap is on or they work after a second press.

 

I am with more options solution. It wont hurt to have alternatives. The full clickable cockpit is good and it will be even better when we will use it with Oculus Rift like devices, but now... for people with less interest and less buttons it would be good to have multiple solution to activate a function of the aircraft.

[FSKRipper]

So, no options, no choice, no tollerance for us weaklings, eh? Just press RCTRL+LWIN+9 and then RALT+LSHIFT+% and you have opened the cap! Now only CTRL+ALT+DEL and voila! your gear retracts - realistically! And not even one HOTAS button wasted!

 

The countermeasure example was btw not about being to slow. It was rather about the fact that in the real machine you would not have to waste a single thought on wether or not the cap is open or not. When you reach out to press the button, you would feel the cap and open it within a blink of an eye. It would be one single, smooth movement. But we have two separate, distinct actions to perform - without the help of any tactile feedback.

 

Of for all these examples some sort of solution exists - even I can retract the landing gear sucessfully! Even I am able to fire flares! But still I would prefer an out-of-the-box solution that is a tiny bit more userfriendly. And I can not understand how anyone can be against that. If you don't see the necessity - fine. But why is everyone arguing AGAINST it? As if you would lose something then?

 

I'm with you as long as we are talking about how to make it more user friendly and can get rid of unneccessary buttons (like the weapon selector).

But as you also said here were the first demands in this thread for macros which take parts of this wonderful module and move it to FC3 complexity.

 

This would be the red line for me and as long as nobody could show me a balance option for multiplayer I would be against this kind of development.

 

Btw for the countermeasure thing. When you take of in your A-10 countermeasures won't work until you switch the CMSP out of standby. In all the years nobody had a problem with it. May it be that the wider community through steam lead to these (good and bad) developments?

[PiedDroit]

To me the request for simpler operations on keyboard is legitimate and also perfectly in line with the realism constraint.

 

While you are in the cockpit it's easier to see what you're doing, having to click several things for one action is fine, it's what I like about it - it's realistic and satisfies the little nerd inside me.

 

But when it comes to the keyboard it's much harder, you don't see what you're doing and some simplication would be welcome.

And users of programmable joystick interfaces are clearly at an advantage over the others - so much for the "balance in multiplayer".

 

So, to me, adding simpler operations is a must, in my case if I want to fiddle with something in the pit I'll do it with the mouse and if for some operations it's too complicated/dangerous to do (because of loss of sight of bandit or ground), I'll program a chunk of TARGET code to do it with one HOTAS switch - something that not everyone have the opportunity to do.

Edited December 31, 2014 by PiedDroit

[zaelu]

Now, obviously simplifications would be welcomed in some of the chores like canopy operating, landing gear... but radar and weapon operations... like setting up the weapons for desired attack and operating the radar... I don't think can be "simplified" without going to FC3 or Game mode zone... which imho are not desired... so much work in simulating the complexity of this vintage aircraft would be lost.

 

I don't think anyone will have any satisfaction for having Mig21Bis in FC3 mode... it simply isn't that effective in ground attack and in AA mode it also lacks good fangs... so after playing with a simplified aircraft most will lose interest in it and fly something else.

[PiedDroit]

I don't think anyone will have any satisfaction for having Mig21Bis in FC3 mode... it simply isn't that effective in ground attack and in AA mode it also lacks good fangs... so after playing with a simplified aircraft most will lose interest in it and fly something else.

 

This not FC3 mode, at all! FC3 difference with DCS level is not about key bindings only, it's more about avionics simplification.

And I believe that more people would be interested in the aircraft rather than the opposite, if the keyboard mapping were easier to remember.

 

I think the request is not about making over-simplication here - that's what I understood so far, I may be wrong though.

 

Things to be simplified are the switches that require to unlock stuff before (switch cover), and toggles. More like this:

Now, obviously simplifications would be welcomed in some of the chores like canopy operating, landing gear..

[King_Hrothgar]

Let's look at the landing gear as an example for how to do it right. Some here keep claiming that 3 buttons for it is fine (cycle down, cycle up, safety). However, this could be done with 2 buttons and still be 100% realistic even on the most basic level. You could have your safety button and then a single up/down key that cycles all three positions cyclically.

 

In this setup, you press the gear key and if the lever is neutral and the gear is down, it will go into the up position. Press it again and it goes back to neutral. A third press puts it into lower and a fourth puts it back into neutral. At that point the cycle repeats. You will never want to put the lever in lower if the gear is already down. So no functionality is lost and certainly no realism. Even if for some odd reason you do want to go back into a previous position, you can simply cycle your way to it. It doesn't hurt anything.

 

As for covers/safeties, if you want those, use 2-3 keys to open and use. Slap a ctrl/alt/shift/win in there in addition to whatever key. Now you have your keyboard safety cover. Going back to the gear example, instead of using G for raise/neutral/lower gear, you can make it ctrl G. Now you have your extra button press for the safety on it and like with the real plane, it is a single motion of your hand.

[jaydee]

Yes, standardized controls should be the norm on all planes of DCS. No need for further complications by using personal preferences of X or Y developer. Like Kneeboard put on Rctrl+Arrows etc.

 

About the Rudder moving the throttles, this is quite easy to explain. The developers can't test all the hardware in the world and then create individual profiles for each and every joystick and even then to have bugs to correct or failures to work out... So they create a principal controller profile and for each joystick or controller detected the default axis and buttons are assigned from that single profile. It's annoying but there is no alternative way that is economic. You can use clear category button to mass clear controls and axis.

 

Learning to fly an accurate representation of an aircraft and not having nightmares about configuring buttons and more often learning where and why they are scattered around the cockpit is just a dream IMHO. Mig21Bis is not really hard to configure as it is to find the controls in the pit t the beginning.

 

I use these menus for ten years and yes it take me under 10 minutes to configure the controls on a new plane... but this is just like an anecdote... if you stay calm and look a bit at the controls and their function and their grouping you start to build a picture of them... you can't expect to instant understand such... "sweet mess"... immediately.

 

Try to imagine a better way of configuring the interface... I proposed once removing the drop down menus and replacing them with buttons around the screen like in the MFDs...

 

Maybe some schematic pictures of the controls/cokpits would be also good...

Zaelu, I don't want to see any thing "Simplified" in the Cockpit or otherwise.

I simply would like to see a more "Harmonised" GUI for Inputs. That's all !

 

I really can't understand why some complan when they get realistic aircraft like this, everyone is crying for more realism and swear by it, but when you give them exactly that some complain. Also don't compare "other" aircraft with MIG-21, they are not the same aircraft and do not operate the same... just learn how to use it. It's not that hard.

Whos crying and Complaining about realism ? I thought the topic was about Inputs.

^THIS

Contructive Post !

[GriffonBR]

Forget about it jaydee, these guys here never understand a simple request. Is more funny get out the topic and flame everything. There is a lot of apple polisher here and we can't continue a simple talk. Let's carry on.

 

And thanks for the other players who understood what I was asking for.:thumbup:

[jkeiltaylor]

Adding a modifier to your controls will nearly double the available buttons to map on your flight stick. This won't help with multiple keys for one action, but it will give you more available buttons on your controller.

[CoBlue]

I simply would like to see a more "Harmonised" GUI for Inputs. That's all !

 

Whos crying and Complaining about realism ? I thought the topic was about Inputs.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

 

It's not unreasonable, nor does it dumb down any realism whatsoever, to add an toggle option for any cover, button or leaver.

 

I just want to have this option as I'm flying with trackIR & sometimes trying to point at a button with the mouse & trying to keep the mouse steady & at the same time flip or push is really hard & time consuming......& that's unrealistic IMHO, since we are not sitting in the real cockpit but in front of ours PC's;)

[FSKRipper]

Forget about it jaydee, these guys here never understand a simple request. Is more funny get out the topic and flame everything. There is a lot of apple polisher here and we can't continue a simple talk. Let's carry on.

 

And thanks for the other players who understood what I was asking for.:thumbup:

 

No flaming Griffon but you should explain how your Hotas is overwhelmed by the commands. If you don't have it here is a very good solution to use the gear and the flaps on ONE three way button each.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=130459

 

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

 

It's not unreasonable, nor does it dumb down any realism whatsoever, to add an toggle option for any cover, button or leaver.

 

I just want to have this option as I'm flying with trackIR & sometimes trying to point at a button with the mouse & trying to keep the mouse steady & at the same time flip or push is really hard & time consuming......& that's unrealistic IMHO, since we are not sitting in the real cockpit but in front of ours PC's;)

 

As you may have discovered, most triggers can be used where a first press unflips the cover and the second pulls the button.

 

I will give just an example to think of... Most people in this thread including me are confused about a weapon selector with 11 different switch positions. Now imagine LN fix it to a two key assignment. Up and down. I can imagine it will take not more than a month until the first people are complaining why it takes 6 klicks of a button to switch to their AA weapons in a dogfight.

[Shanakin]

Having actually made an authotkey script that does Pylon back/forward it's actually really simple and fast. I also have a button that moves it to between Bombs/Rockets/Air-to-Air for quick changes but it's not really necessary.

 

It's not too bad remembering the keys on the keyboard to do it (it is after all just the number line) but I don't have to take my hands off the HOTAS and it's all very smooth.

[Flagrum]

No flaming Griffon but you should explain how your Hotas is overwhelmed by the commands. If you don't have it here is a very good solution to use the gear and the flaps on ONE three way button each.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=130459

 

 

 

As you may have discovered, most triggers can be used where a first press unflips the cover and the second pulls the button.

 

I will give just an example to think of... Most people in this thread including me are confused about a weapon selector with 11 different switch positions. Now imagine LN fix it to a two key assignment. Up and down. I can imagine it will take not more than a month until the first people are complaining why it takes 6 klicks of a button to switch to their AA weapons in a dogfight.

There are no 3-way buttons. That becomes really clear if you look at my HOTAS for example:

 

A button is always either depressed or not depressed - no middle postion! :o)

And even for a 2-way function these are not always really practicable - as you, unlike typical switches, have to keep them depressed.

 

If I would map the gear handle to my Hotas, I would have

1 button "Gear lock open"

1 button "gear lock close"

1 button "gear up"

1 button "gear neutral"

1 button "gear down"

:puke:

 

I would be happy already with something like

1 button to toggle gear lock open/close

1 button to toggle gear up/neutral

1 button to toggle gear neutral/down

 

but ideally:

1 x gear lock open/gear lock close

1x gear up/gear neutral/gear down

 

 

And what I actually have discovered is, that important caps are not opened by subsequent presses of the respective button. Examples: "Drop Countermeasures" (at least if only ASO is installed - haven't tested it with the SPS) or "Drag Chute - Disconnect".

 

And if the weapon selector could be used with two functions "turn left" and "turn right" would not harm anyone ... if we would get these bindings additionally.

 

edit:

I find it really great that LNS took the effords to implement every single aspect that can be moved or actuated in some way and provided a mapping for it. This was always a big issue for home cockpit builders and there were lately some effords of the community to research and collect alternatives for existing aircraft where this was not the case, yet. But now we have just the other extreme and users with not so sophisticated equipment as i.e. the home cockpit users, are left out to some extend.

Edited January 3, 2015 by Flagrum

[FSKRipper]

A button is always either depressed or not depressed - no middle postion! :o)

 

Forgive me, I'm not the best in late night translations :megalol:

 

There we come to the point: adding these switches additionally...

this would be the opposite of the shortened keyboard layout lists that many people demand...

BTW as some people said a user friendly GUI would fall in the hands of ED and seems to be wrong in this thread

 

I have no problem with it as long as there is no "light" mode introduced like: "I" key = turn radar on, switch to AA-SAR weapons and maybe get an IFF check

 

To get back to canopy and switches like pylons I won't follow the most arguments. There is no reason these has to be on a HOTAS. To get the aircraft ready for a fight you have the FENCE check. Like in the A-10 it is too late to programm your weapons setup when the first shells pass your canopy :music_whistling:

 

We should always remember that this is no modern optimized jet nor was it intended by LN. This plane is more than 40 years old and originates from an era where minimized workload for the pilot was a foreign concept.

 

I think there is still no other plane in DCS to compare, that maybe the difference

 

Edit: I think that closes this this theme for myself since everything is said and the decision lies in better qualified hands.

Edited January 3, 2015 by FSKRipper

[Flagrum]

Forgive me, I'm not the best in late night translations :megalol:

 

There we come to the point: adding these switches additionally...

this would be the opposite of the shortened keyboard layout lists that many people demand...

BTW as some people said a user friendly GUI would fall in the hands of ED and seems to be wrong in this thread

 

I have no problem with it as long as there is no "light" mode introduced like: "I" key = turn radar on, switch to AA-SAR weapons and maybe get an IFF check

 

To get back to canopy and switches like pylons I won't follow the most arguments. There is no reason these has to be on a HOTAS. To get the aircraft ready for a fight you have the FENCE check. Like in the A-10 it is too late to programm your weapons setup when the first shells pass your canopy :music_whistling:

 

We should always remember that this is no modern optimized jet nor was it intended by LN. This plane is more than 40 years old and originates from an era where minimized workload for the pilot was a foreign concept.

 

I think there is still no other plane in DCS to compare, that maybe the difference

 

Edit: I think that closes this this theme for myself since everything is said and the decision lies in better qualified hands.

Well, it is not just a matter of language/translation - there is just a big difference in semantics. You probably had the TM Warthog in mind with it's plenty switches - yes, one could put them to good use with the MiG-21, no doubt. But then there are those who use different HOTAS'.

 

I doubt, that the concern is that the mapping list is too long. "Harmonizing" means, that the same functions should be mapped the same way across different aircraft. That does not mean, that no additional possibilities could exist.