Latches, covers: Can we please assign two actions in a sequence to one button?

[Vander]

Feature request:

Can we have a feature where we can assign two (or more) actions to one button in a sequence? The user would then be able to combine 'open latch'  with 'gear up' for instance.

Rationale:

I have bought the Mosquito the moment it was in pre-order and I love it! It seems everything is done to the highest standards! The cockpit is a work of art! Then I was confronted with several extra latches and covers to operate gear/flaps/guns/bomb panel etc. This is perfectly fine as this is how the aircraft was designed. But it does create some practical problems for me.

I love the clickable cockpit we have in the DCS modules, but I still like to map as much of the controls to physical buttons. On the ground, during cold startup, it's okay. I can look around with trackir or VR and flick all the switches with relative ease with the mouse (with some exceptions). But when I am in the air and everything moves it's very hard to flick a little lever here and open a latch there. I have pretty high end controller hardware, but I simply can't map all those latches and covers, let alone remember them.

So my first request was: Can we have an option that automatically takes care of any covers or latches for you? But I think that wil be hard to implement since we already have so many modules and a lot by 3rd party devs. So maybe better to have a generic feature that let's you do it yourself.

 

[SharpeXB]

Gaming keyboards have extra function keys which could do this. Just assign them to execute a macro of a two key sequence with one press. Combine the “cover up” and “gear up” to a single key press. 

Edited November 6, 2021 by SharpeXB

[Tippis]

You mean as in, pressing a (latched/covered) switch input the first time is automatically interpreted as “open latch” and then the second input actually operates the switch, and possibly, conversely, pressing it when the switch is already in a closed position also closes the latch/cover?

That would require a fair bit of logic that isn't really in the game at the moment, in particular since it is really allergic to double-binding things.

If the option was just “ignore covers”, so that operating a covered switch via a bind would just flip it, opening the cover if necessary but for all intents and purposes ignoring the cover position, then that would probably be a bit more doable (if nothing else because we've already had switches that operate like that… although those were mostly considered bugs. ). But of course, the covers are usually there fore a reason, so that might be a bit… accident prone.

Still, if refined, it doesn't sound like a horrible idea.

9 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Gaming keyboards have macro buttons which could do this. Just assign them to execute two commands with one press. 

As always, that wouldn't actually solve the problem described, as would be obvious to you if you thought about how macros work for more than, oh, half a second or so.

 

[SharpeXB]

4 hours ago, Tippis said:

As always, that wouldn't actually solve the problem described

I have a Logitech gaming keyboard which has extra function “G Keys” which can be assigned “macros” such as key press sequences. For example I have the engine start RShift+Home assigned to one etc. It would work to do exactly what the OP is asking for.

[cfrag]

20 hours ago, Vander said:

Can we have a feature where we can assign two (or more) actions to one button in a sequence?

I know that this isn't helping much, but you can use a macro tool like Voice Attack or joystick Gremlin to add sequences like this to a button click. Now, since you probably want to have a sequence per module, this is a far from ideal solution, but it might be stop-gap.

 

[Vander]

Thanks guys. Yes, I am aware that there are a number of solutions to do this using 3rd party tools & software. But maintaining your controller mappings in DCS is already hard enough as it is, I don't want to be dependent on another tool with yet another config to maintain. I would really like some sort of built-in solution. The 'ignore cover' option would be best, but I don't know how hard that is to implement. For now, I'll use my mouse to awkwardly find a latch and flip it. I think the real problem is that in real life you can almost do the two actions in one motion: flip open the cover and flick a switch. In the sim it becomes very unnatural, unless you have it built in in your controller hardware. I have one cover and switch on my Virpil throttle I can use that way.

[Tippis]

10 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

I have a Logitech gaming keyboard which has extra function “G Keys” which can be assigned “macros” such as key press sequences.

…and, as mentioned, that wouldn't actually solve the problem described.

RShift+Home isn't a macro (keys in sequence)  — it's a combo (keys being pressed at the same time, hence the little ‘+’ sign), so that example is pretty useless and is not what the OP is asking for.

Now, the G-keys can be programmed with macros as well, but what it can't do, and which the OP's idea pretty much requires, is to know the game state. It also can't know what plane you're flying. It also can't know when to repeat button presses, when to reverse the order, and when not to do them at all. And that is the crux of the matter: you can't just macro together [operate latch] + [operate switch] because you don't know the state of either, and if you don't know the state, you don't know in which order those two actions need to happen. If you don't know the plane, you don't know when it matters and when it doesn't, and that's on top of needing to create two dozen different profiles to cover all planes.

There is no convention in the game as to whether closing a latch automatically switches the switch off as well, or if the latch is blocked; there is no convention in the game as to whether there are separate up/down states that can be mapped; and there's even less of that in the cases when there are multi-stage switches being hidden behind the covers.

All of that means that the simple idea of macroing together open + operate isn't even available in many modules, and in the ones that are, you end up not actually saving any keys because you end up picking between “let's macro together an open+close and an on+off function” (two different buttons), and “let's macro together an open/on and an off/close function” (and note the difference in order here) — either way, you have spent two keys on it and the whole effort was pretty much wasted. And in the first case, it's doubly wasted because those functions are commonly already in place, and the separation between on/off-states is just an extra convenience added for cockpit builders. Alternatively, you end up with a macro that does things in the wrong order because, again, you don't know the game state. You can't use the same macro for open+on as for off+close because of the order of operation, so you once again have to make two different macros and you've once again done a lot of work for nothing — you still need two separate buttons to fire off the two separate macros, which is no improvement over having two separate buttons to simply operate the cover and the switch.

The only way around this is to hook into a script that knows the game state (DCS BIOS-style) and to put some pretty extensive branching logic into your macros, and then hope that you can even hook those two up properly. In most cases you can't, and without going full bore on third-party macro programs, you won't even have the logic available to support it. Again, that's an insane amount of modding and per-module work just to get functionality that we know for a fact can be built into the game: the option that covers don't actually matter because they follow the underlying switch, and have that option work universally across all modules.

[Tenebrae Aeternae]

Wholeheartedly agree with op, it can get really annoying with latches without adding anything to the experience.

[SharpeXB]

4 hours ago, Tippis said:

Now, the G-keys can be programmed with macros as well

Right. They would solve this issue here 

4 hours ago, Tippis said:

RShift+Home isn't a macro (keys in sequence)  — it's a combo (keys being pressed at the same time

That’s just and example of what I’m using. A macro could be keys in sequence or a lot of other things. Many game keyboards and keypads can do this. 

4 hours ago, Tippis said:

It also can't know what plane you're flying

You’d have to create profiles for different aircraft. In the end, mapping keys to functions in the clickable cockpit is a losing battle because there are just so many. You’d need to pick just a few commonly used commands.

Edited November 7, 2021 by SharpeXB

[SharpeXB]

4 hours ago, Tenebrae Aeternae said:

Wholeheartedly agree with op, it can get really annoying with latches without adding anything to the experience.

Lots of modules contain simplifications and combinations like:

Flaps Up

Flaps Down

Flaps Toggle

So you could map this to a single button rather than two. Perhaps the same logic could be done for the guarded switches. But that’s on the developer or third party. 

[Tippis]

13 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Right. They would solve this issue here 

Read again to understand why they wouldn't.
Then respond to that reasoning rather than just repeat the same thing over and over again.

13 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

That’s just and example of what I’m using.

…and again, it is not something that applies to what the OP wants to do. Read again to understand why.
If you don't understand, ask for clarification rather than repeat the same thing over and over again. If you're going to try to use examples of an alternate solution to what the OP is proposing, at least try to come up with ones that actually match what is being discussed.

13 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

You’d have to create profiles for different aircraft. 

…and again, that is only part of the problem — it doesn't solve the really crucial issue (nor it is really a sensible burden to put on the player).
This, too, has been explained. If the issue is too complex because it involves multiple parts — all of which are blockers — ask about the part that confuses you rather than repeat the same thing over and over again.

So, to conclude: no, simple macro solutions will not do the trick, especially not something as bare-bones and simplistic as Logitech's G keys, since they have no game integration whatsoever and since they're a massive faff to get to work even with a single module. What is needed, for the reasons explained, is an in-game, context-aware (or just context-ignoring) option

Edited November 7, 2021 by Tippis

[SharpeXB]

1 minute ago, Tippis said:

What is needed, for the reasons explained, is an in-game, context-aware (or just context-ignoring) option

The better solution would be to have the ED or the 3rd party Dev add some simplified key commands for the guarded switches.  

[Tippis]

Just now, SharpeXB said:

The better solution would be to have the ED or the 3rd party Dev add some simplified key commands for the guarded switches.  

Why would that be better than a universal option?

[SharpeXB]

Just now, Tippis said:

Why would that be better than a universal option?

It would just be easier for everyone involved. So the options for the Mosquito would look something like:

Landing Gear Handle Guard Open

Landing Gear Handle Guard Closed

Landing Gear Up

Landing Gear Down

Landing Gear Toggle (operates all the commands in sequence with one button)

I think many other (all?) modules have a “Gear Toggle” command, I’m surprised the Mosquito doesn’t (I don’t own it, maybe it does)

[Tippis]

2 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

It would just be easier for everyone involved.

How so? You're not really explaining your reasoning.

In what way would it be easier to have to dig through a much larger number of bind options that only exist to duplicate and combine other functions, for every aircraft, rather than have a single switch that does it for all of them at once? Remember, this is for players who don't feel they have enough input options available to them to bind everything — that lack of inputs will be true regardless of the module, so it's highly likely that if they want it for one aircraft, they'll want it for all aircraft.

2 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

So the options for the Mosquito would look something like:

Landing Gear Handle Guard Open

Landing Gear Handle Guard Closed

Landing Gear Up

Landing Gear Down

Landing Gear Toggle (operates all the commands in sequence with one button)

How is that easier for anyone than Options -> Gameplay -> “Automatically operate covers/latches” [✓] ?

Use your words. Explain why it is easier — why it is “better” — to fill up the bind list with literally hundreds of new binds and force third-party developers to add all this overlap rather than have it all condensed into a single thing. And just a hint: there are arguments for your idea, but you're nowhere near being able to articulate them at the moment… (also, they're still not arguments against the OP's wish).

[Tenebrae Aeternae]

50 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Lots of modules contain simplifications and combinations like:

Flaps Up

Flaps Down

Flaps Toggle

So you could map this to a single button rather than two. Perhaps the same logic could be done for the guarded switches. But that’s on the developer or third party. 

I could do it myself actually and create custom functions to be binded, but quite frankly just can't be arsed anymore. I did solve some issues by myself for a while until my module list got just too big for that. 3-way toggles and toggle off positions are supported only for a fraction of functions that needs them.

 

Hornet is a good example. It has a 3-position toggle for flaps. Hotas warthog controller has one aswell, but can you map it by default? No! You can after you write few lines of code to make the flaps use the middle "off" position as a function.

Edited November 7, 2021 by Tenebrae Aeternae

[SharpeXB]

18 minutes ago, Tippis said:

How is that easier for anyone than Options -> Gameplay -> “Automatically operate covers/latches” [✓] ?

Because that would mean every third party Dev updating their modules to incorporate that new function. 

[Tippis]

13 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Because that would mean every third party Dev updating their modules to incorporate that new function. 

And presumably, adding in hundreds of overlapping binds to cover all eventualities and combinations of switchology would be done by… who? The bind fairy?

No, that's not something that makes your idea easier because the exact same thing would have to happen with that one as well.

Edited November 7, 2021 by Tippis

[Tenebrae Aeternae]

8 minutes ago, Tippis said:

And presumably, adding in hundreds of overlapping binds to cover all eventualities and combinations of switchology would be done by… who? The bind fairy?

No, that's not something that makes your idea easier because the exact same thing would have to happen with that one as well.

 

Actually your option has the potential to have the smaller per module workload, depends how the option is implemented to the base game.