Poll Re: SRS Simple Radio Frequency Setting Behaviour

[Shadoga]

Dear fellow SRS users,

 

this poll serves to collect your opinion on a certain SRS frequency input behaviour, so that SRS creator Ciribob can see what a broader range of users think and if there is a need for change in the software.

 

As an introduction, my change request and Ciribob's reply quoted from the main SRS thread:

Sorry for not searching all 1900 posts in detail if this has been (probably) discussed, decided and communicated before:

 

My biggest gripe with the use of SRS (regarding frequency input for e.g. FC3 a/c through the SRS radio window) is the logic of depency of adjacent digits:

In almost all aircraft radios I ever came across, each digit or digit group is independently set from its neighbours - if you select from 8 to 1 by rotating upward throught 0, no next higher neighbouring digit is counted up 1 value.

Every time I use SRS, I stumble at least once per sim session over this logic "trap" of having dependent digits.

Once I'm setting a new frequency, I would like to set it each digit or digit group on its own, from left to right, each digit via the shortest way upward or downward, without side effect - as a no-brainer.

Just count this as a loud vote for change, and sorry again for not searching thoroughly for previous posts regarding this subject!

 

Edit: Since this is my first post in this thread:

Thanks a Sorry, sbunch, @Ciribob, for your hard work and this great addition to DCS multiplayer realism!!!

The main reason for the numbers ticking up and literally just adding or removing a set number of MHz is ease of programming and also the fact the numbers are not going to be aligned with the buttons so I did it because I thought it would be less confusing.

 

If others feel that each Mz button should work independently i.e tick up a single digit - let me know and I'll add it to the list.

 

...

 

So please, let us know here by vote and/or comment what you think about this:

 

- Vote for "no change" if you find the current dependent input logic convenient and more suitable for you.

 

- Vote for "change", if you would like SRS to behave more like the majority of real-world (aviation) radios with independent value inputs for each digit or digit group.

 

If you have any further questions or even didn't get what I'm talking about at all, let me know below and I will try to answer or to explain the subject in more detail.

 

Thanks in advance, kind regards.

Edited March 25, 2018 by Shadoga

[Shadoga]

I would support this little change. Basically all in-game and real life radios usually do it with a seperate knob for each digit of the frequency. It helps to keep your eyes out of the cockpit. Change UHF from 240.0 to 269.1 you "grab" the 00X.XX knob and go up two clicks to 269.00, now the XX0.xx you simply need to decrease one click to 249.0, then you grab the XXX.00 knob and tick it up two clicks (.05 increments) to 261.10 then you check the set frequency with a quick glance. That is a straightforward Workflow, and does not require to monitor the display all the time.

 

Increasing another digit is confusing.

 

If you use the example above you would have set 259.1 in the end, as the decrease to XX9.xx would have slewed the already dialed 26X.xx down to 25X.xx

:thumbup:

[shagrat]

Basically just mimick what DCS is doing with the ingame radios.

If you set the radio ingame for the A-10C, Huey or any full clickable module it uses the true to life knob per digit, without influencing adjacent digits. Now if you set the same radio frequency in SRS the logic is different? That doesn't make sense. :dunno:

[Shadoga]

220 views vs. 13 votes - come on fellows, give us one simple click and vote!

[NeilWillis]

Just because you feel it needs a change doesn't mean there is an issue.

 

That's why you're getting such a low feedback rate. It doesn't seem to me that Ciribob really has much interest either.

 

You can easily change frequencies within cockpits, so what exactly is the problem with the current system?

 

As long as you know what it does, it's predictable, and you just need to adapt your inputs to suit. There are far more pressing issues to deal with.

[shagrat]

Just because you feel it needs a change doesn't mean there is an issue.

 

That's why you're getting such a low feedback rate. It doesn't seem to me that Ciribob really has much interest either.

 

You can easily change frequencies within cockpits, so what exactly is the problem with the current system?

 

As long as you know what it does, it's predictable, and you just need to adapt your inputs to suit. There are far more pressing issues to deal with.

There is NO clickable cockpit for FC3 planes. Thus whenever you use your assigned buttons in SRS the concept of changing frequency changes to "Look at the keyboard to see what button you press, then see what frequency you actually got". With VR-Headsets you add a difficult to read display to that.

 

That is why a consistent and true-to-a-real-radio way of changing frequency is a pretty good idea.

[Shadoga]

@Ciribob: How about making both frequency dial logics optional and configurable in settings? - Too high of a workload to program the missing realistic one and/or too low in priority of software changes, I guess?

[ApoNOOB]

I approve this notion, this is only really an issue if you play FC3/non integrated radios/ AWACS, so I can understand that most people don't even understand why this is an issue. But current implementation is really unintuitive, one misclick and you have to use quite a while to fix all the frequencys up again. =) For me in AWACS slot, quickly switching a freq is just not in the cards.

 

You can easily change frequencies within cockpits, so what exactly is the problem with the current system?

This highlights the confusion, Neil please read OP again. Edited March 25, 2018 by ApoNOOB