stick forces-please make them optional

[NineLine]

the point that your joystick inputs are now not resembling the virtual joystick inputs anymore is proven i think.your request for a track is ridiculous in this case.

 

Well, if you cant show a problem, I cant report a problem, I cant replicate as my 109 flies just fine, its only improved since release. So there really is nothing more to say here.

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

the feature which some see as a problem is explained and confirmed even in the changelog... :)

 

the topic is about why some see it problematic.

[312_Lobo]

As for me, at high speed nobody is forcing me to yank the joystick beyond the point where it apparently no longer has any effect (i.e. plane is not reacting any more, since I reached cutting force limit and virtual pilot is no longer able pull more). Only maniac would keep pulling, as far as I can tell... . And as soon as speed decreases and plane starts doing something I don't wan't it to do, e.g. tightening the turn, I can easily compensate by decreasing the joystick deflection as I would do IRL.

...

 

EDIT: I do not like current implementation where all available physical travel of player device is interpolated between neutral position and (current) cutting force position of virtual control stick in game.

 

Please make the current implementation optional. I'd like to have 1:1 joystick/virtual stick movement ratio back. Even if it means that after reaching the position of current cutting force limit the virtual control stick stops moving in game while there is more deflection travel available on gaming device.

 

 

Reason for editing: After more testing (and because of this http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2331636&postcount=130 and this http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2331660&postcount=131) I corrected the above statement.

Edited February 28, 2015 by do.st

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

^^oh i love to see the physical limits now...i like to not longer be able to roll like a modern jet at 700kph....i like to not longer be able to pull the stick completely back on a dime at 700kph....but everything within the limits should be let alone, and up to us....and that should be optional.

 

if i decide to yank my stick back fast at 300kph, i want the virtual stick to do that as well, and get me into a spin or stall...i want the FM to punish me for this.i also want, as long as within the limits, that if i hold my stick in a certain position, that the virtual stick remains there as well....be it correct behaviour or not...the FM and DM should be responsible then to punish me in case of the latter.

[312_Lobo]

Ok David. Sorry I originally misunderstood what you are reporting as an issue. Well after more thorough testing I think I see it. There is no longer 1:1 ratio between joystick deflection and deflection of virtual stick in game. Which means that at 700km/h were you IRL would be able to move the stick just 2cm because you don't have enough physical strength to pull it more. Now you have to move your joystick all the way back to move the virtual stick by those 2cm.

 

So what you are suggesting is keep 1:1 ratio (or make it optional at least) and only what cutting force limit should do is to stop virtual stick movement at that limit even if player keeps deflecting joystick beyond (current) position of cutting force limit.

 

Well, in that case you can count me as converted :). I edited and corrected my previous post http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2331632&postcount=129.

Edited February 28, 2015 by do.st

[NineLine]

if i decide to yank my stick back fast at 300kph, i want the virtual stick to do that as well

 

That is what my 109 does right now, if I yank the stick back at 300kph, I see the virtual stick move back as well and trouble ensues... still not seeing the issue. It's only when the forces exceed the pilots ability/strength to pull past that you see a difference in your flight stick and the virtual one, and sorry... that just makes sense... it makes less sense to say its realistic to be able to pull the stick back farther than a pilot would be able to in real life... and that is the simple truth.

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

it makes less sense to say its realistic to be able to pull the stick back farther than a pilot would be able to in real life... and that is the simple truth.

 

you are obviously ignoring the parts in all my posts on purpose, where i repeatedly said that i want these limits to be implemented.i never said i want to be able to pull more than possible in real life.so please dont put words in my mouth to make me look like i want a unrealistic advantage.thx

[NineLine]

you are obviously ignoring the parts in all my posts on purpose, where i repeatedly said that i want these limits to be implemented.i never said i want to be able to pull more than possible in real life.so please dont put words in my mouth to make me look like i want a unrealistic advantage.thx

 

You cant have it both ways. You cant have 1:1 stick movements, as well as limiting your controls in a realistic manner, I am not sure what you want, but how ED has implemented seems to be the best solution, and Yo-Yo isnt planning on changing it, so there you go. Case closed.

[312_Lobo]

Let's say that at 0km/h speed real/virtual control stick travel (neutral to max deflection) is 20cm. On my joystick it's 5cm.

 

In real plane flying at 700km/h I'll be able to move the real stick e.g. by 2cm (i.e. to 10% mark of available travel) until I reach the point where I cannot apply more force (physiological limit, which is now simulated by cutting force).

 

In current implementation when I fly above speed where cutting force limit kicks in, I have to move my joystick all the way back (5cm or 100% of it's travel) to move virtual controls stick by 2cm to 10% mark of max travel which is the current cutting force limit position.

 

What Id' like to have back is 1:1 travel conversion, at least as an option, even if it means that I can reach the cutting force after just .5cm of available 5cm travel of my joystick. I'm aware that it means that deflecting joystick more does not move virtual control stick further beyond cutting force limit. In other words, if IRL at given speed I would reach cutting force at 5% of max deflection of control stick, I want to have the option to reach that limit it in game by moving my joystick by 5% of it's travel limit. I believe that this is how it was working in DCS before recent patch.

 

This is not removing any limits, it's just changing the way how that limit is reached by player control device.

Edited February 28, 2015 by do.st

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

^^this. no unrealistic advantage.just other implementation.make it optional and everybody will be happy.

[NineLine]

 

In current implementation when I fly above speed where cutting force limit kicks in, I have to move my joystick all the way back (5cm or 100% of it's travel) to move virtual controls stick by 2cm to 10% mark of max travel which is the current cutting force limit position.

 

I keep going back and flying the 109, thinking I am missing something, but I dont see where I have to move my stick all the way back like you are stating you have to, I can move it a small amount to achieve that small movement you are stating... I am not seeing what you two are saying you are experiencing...

 

Which I go back to the same thing I got called ridiculous for, show me a track or video with the control indicator and virtual stick showing and show me this happening, because I am not seeing it on my end... at 700kph my stick moved the same as my virtual one, into my maneuver as I slowed, I was able to pull the virtual stick farther back as I still had plenty of movement available on my actual stick...

[macnihilist]

What Id' like to have back is 1:1 travel conversion, at least as an option, even if it means that I can reach the cutting force after just .5cm of available 5cm travel of my joystick. I'm aware that it means that deflecting joystick more does not move virtual control stick further beyond cutting force limit. In other words, if IRL at given speed I would reach cutting force at 5% of max deflection of control stick, I want to have the option to reach that limit it in game by moving my joystick by 5% of it's travel limit. I believe that this is how it was working in DCS before recent patch.

 

This is not removing any limits, it's just changing the way how that limit is reached by player control device.

 

Honestly: this sounds like a much better solution. The current system feels unnaturally soft and you have to constantly adjust stick position where in reality you would just 'adjust' stick force. Also, it seems almost impossible to develop a situation-independent muscle memory for stick positions now.

[312_Lobo]

Which I go back to the same thing I got called ridiculous for, show me a track or video with the control indicator and virtual stick showing and show me this happening, because I am not seeing it on my end... at 700kph my stick moved the same as my virtual one, into my maneuver as I slowed, I was able to pull the virtual stick farther back as I still had plenty of movement available on my actual stick...

 

 

 

Ok here's the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qempD_gNf8k&feature=youtu.be

 

My point is that with current implementation you need full joystick deflection to reach current cutting force limit at given speed. IRL you need fraction of full travel to reach it. I'd really appreciate having an option to reach cutting force with fraction of max joystick deflection similarly as it is IRL. Thing is that moving my joystick further beyond the current cutting force limit would not move virtual stick and controls (indicator would stay at the limit) and won't have any effect on plane performance.

 

A side effect of current implementation is that at the end and when I'm pulling up, with decreasing speed the position of cutting force limit changes and this is causing un-commanded move of the virtual stick (indicator) which tightens the loop/turn although I do not move the joystick -- this is what is pretty counter-intuitive for me.

Edited February 28, 2015 by do.st

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

Which I go back to the same thing I got called ridiculous for, show me a track or video with the control indicator and virtual stick showing and show me this happening, because I am not seeing it on my end... at 700kph my stick moved the same as my virtual one, into my maneuver as I slowed, I was able to pull the virtual stick farther back as I still had plenty of movement available on my actual stick...

 

ehm sith...the control indicator window shows the virtual stick position and not your joystick position...so of course the red control indicator window will match with the virtual joystick....thats why i also said that your request for a track is somehow ridiculous, as it will just not show the stick position of my controller...

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

Well, I still think this is the way to go - just needs fine tuning.

 

I don't want to sound like making comparisons by the negative - I re-installed DCS, and really love this sim, when I read about this new feature, because I really didn't like the way it was regarding a total looseness of the controls... In Il2 BoS the method is exactly the same, only it feels more "realistic" to me the way the filter is implemented.

 

When our Bf109, Fw190... approach higher speeds we start seeing exactly what we see in DCS, the controls ( all, not just the stick, depending on the aircraft model ) start moving at a slower pace than what we use to deflect them, and they also loose range. In the Bf109 F4 and in the Fw190 A3 it is particularly noticeable in pitch. But overall the outcome feels more realistic to me. Yesterday at around 700km/h I noticed the stick in the K4 didn't practically move sideways ( roll ), and any roll inputs resulted in practically no movement ....

 

BUT THEN!!!!!! When I read the texts where RL pilots describe their experience with stick forces in the 109 at those higher speeds, I notice it took them two arms / hands to deflect it left or right!!! So... maybe DCS is even more close to the real thing ?

 

Anyway, again, I think we're in the right way!

 

Now we need to get those rocket climb speeds fine tuned - I feel the K4 has, overall, a bit less drag than it should ( parasitic ).

[Solty]

Ughh your stick is just a tool to move the stick in game. How is that so many flight sim veterans that came here from other titles and have the knowledge about 109 behaviour are so happy about it except for you.

 

Like really... If it wasn't for this change I would not play DCS anymore. It is a feature that defines WW2 planes! These are not Fly by wire technology!

 

It is extremely important for accurate simulation of the 109 that this feature be implement.

 

With 1:1 input we had 109 that had better roll than the 190 at high speed lol:doh:

 

Edit: it was not t jcom but posts before

Edited February 28, 2015 by Solty

[Solty]

@jcomm It really feels like the aileron control at high speed is perfectly modeled in DCS. I just wish the 109 had 0 rudder trim

[Yo-Yo]

Ok here's the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qempD_gNf8k&feature=youtu.be

 

My point is that with current implementation you need full joystick deflection to reach current cutting force limit at given speed. IRL you need fraction of full travel to reach it. I'd really appreciate having an option to reach cutting force with fraction of max joystick deflection similarly as it is IRL. Thing is that moving my joystick further beyond the current cutting force limit would not move virtual stick and controls (indicator would stay at the limit) and won't have any effect on plane performance.

 

 

This is wrong observation. THis is CUTTING and not RE-SCALING limit. Within this limit the virtual stick has the same linkage to the joystick. And there is no need to "full travel to reach it."

[Yo-Yo]

Ughh your stick is just a tool to move the stick in game. How is that so many flight sim veterans that came here from other titles and have the knowledge about 109 behaviour are so happy about it except for you.

 

Like really... If it wasn't for this change I would not play DCS anymore. It is a feature that defines WW2 planes! These are not Fly by wire technology!

 

It is extremely important for accurate simulation of the 109 that this feature be implement.

 

With 1:1 input we had 109 that had better roll than the 190 at high speed lol:doh:

 

Edit: it was not t jcom but posts before

 

:) FBW do use limits for control surfaces to avoid overstressing the airframe at high IAS. Su-27 rudders, flaperons, stabilisers - they all have their limits.

[Solty]

:) FBW do use limits for control surfaces to avoid overstressing the airframe at high IAS. Su-27 rudders, flaperons, stabilisers - they all have their limits.

 

Just out of curiosity... But the pilot doesn't feel any difference on the stick itself but the airplane behaves differently? Ive heared that stick force in F16 is always costant, just the computer prevents the plane from overcoming limits... Am i correct?

[Derbysieger]

Just out of curiosity... But the pilot doesn't feel any difference on the stick itself but the airplane behaves differently? Ive heared that stick force in F16 is always costant, just the computer prevents the plane from overcoming limits... Am i correct?

 

The F-16 has a force sensing stick that only has very limited range to move. IIRC it wouldn't move at all in early models but it was later changed to move a little bit because of pilot feedback.

[312_Lobo]

This is wrong observation. THis is CUTTING and not RE-SCALING limit. Within this limit the virtual stick has the same linkage to the joystick. And there is no need to "full travel to reach it."

 

Yo-yo, I really respect you opinion and insight, but please look at the video. At the bottom of the screen there is displayed physical deflection on my joystick Y axis and in my opinion it's apparent that control indicator in game is moving between neutral position and cutting force limit and to reach it I have to move joystick to full deflection. So what I see on the video (and what I'm observing in game) is what I would call re-scaling. (Full range of joystick movement from neutral to max deflection is re-scaled to fit between virtual stick neutral position and current cutting force limit.)

 

I'm using linear curvature for pitch so it's not affected by custom axis settings.

 

I'm not saying that current implementation is wrong, I would just prefer CUTTING while what we have now appears to be more like RESCALING. At least it would be great to have option to choose between those two.

Edited February 28, 2015 by do.st

[Friedrich-4B]

The F-16 has a force sensing stick that only has very limited range to move. IIRC it wouldn't move at all in early models but it was later changed to move a little bit because of pilot feedback.

 

According to the F-16CD Block 50 Flight Manual, the total stick movement is 1/4 inch in both axes, with maximum nose up and nose down pitch commands being generated by 26 and 16 pounds of input; roll commands are generated by a maximum of 17 pounds in cruise gains, and 12 pound in takeoff and landing gains:

 

Edited February 28, 2015 by Friedrich-4/B
pounds of input

[Yo-Yo]

Just out of curiosity... But the pilot doesn't feel any difference on the stick itself but the airplane behaves differently? Ive heared that stick force in F16 is always costant, just the computer prevents the plane from overcoming limits... Am i correct?

 

There are several FBW conceptions. Some of them, especially having full-travel stick, use some methods to communicate to the pilot - force changing, shaking, etc. But they are artificial.

[Kwiatek]

What Yo-Yo implement in K-4 is they only way to simulate high stick forces at high speeds. There is no other option. Before was totaly unrealistic - IRL K-4 cant be flown that way.

 

So it is definitly right direction. Probably need still some tuning but is much more realistic then before.

 

As i real life pilots i dont have problem to control K-4 in DCS with new stick force simuilation. Just dont concentrate what you virtual stick is doing but you need to fly a plane. I got FF stick and i have not any problem to control K-4. You now must to rememember that at high speed your plane dont react like at slow speed. YOu need now to use trim.

 

I hope some changes we will see also in other warbirds.

 

I hope also that some spin behaviour changes will be also tweaked in Fw 190 D-9 ;)