Jump to content

Control Response Latency Appears to Have Been Reduced 80ms>10ms


Go to solution Solved by BIGNEWY,

Recommended Posts

Control response (in pitch) has been remeasured due to reported changes on Reddit by @BIGNEWY, this time at 165hz! It appears the response latency in control for the F-16c has been reduced dramatically to a point of imperceptibility in the last update. Changes to pitch rate are seen 2 frames after input at 165 FPS:

Also just to avoid not being smart, I recorded a response at 60fps to make sure it was more time based instead of frame based and confirmed the pitch rate responds on the very next frame.

The black line is the controller input forced by the command LoSetCommand(2001, 0) and LoSetCommand(2001, 1) while recording pitch rates simultaneously from the export.lua using LoGetAngularVelocity()

Also, I can only record pitch or pitch rates AFAIK, not the position of the elevator itself. It is possible the elevator is being moved even sooner before the dynamic model reacts to it.

image.png

newRateFrames.png

response60fps.png


Edited by FusRoPotato
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the reason I am very turned off by the F-16 and dont fly it anymore. I was told something changed the last patch and I tried it out and yes it did actually feel much better but still not great. From what Ive been told, ED tries to simulate the non-moving stick in the real plane there this weird deadzone/delay in movement when moving your stick, but in real life there is no such thing. It makes flying the F-16 such a headache, I wish it would behave more like the F-18 or Mirage 2000 that feel very crisp with stick inputs!

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Input lag was fixed in the last patch but was not added to the patch notes, the team are happy with the results. 

thank you 

  • Like 4

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/6/2024 at 3:36 AM, Jack1nthecrack said:

This is the reason I am very turned off by the F-16 and dont fly it anymore. I was told something changed the last patch and I tried it out and yes it did actually feel much better but still not great. From what Ive been told, ED tries to simulate the non-moving stick in the real plane there this weird deadzone/delay in movement when moving your stick, but in real life there is no such thing. It makes flying the F-16 such a headache, I wish it would behave more like the F-18 or Mirage 2000 that feel very crisp with stick inputs!

It indeed it a lot better already. But that breakout force you mention is what kills all the fun in the F-16 for me too. In reality, the stick does barely move, about an inch maximum, and measures pressure applied. So in the real plane it makes sense to require some minimum pressure applied to the stick. But with what 99,9% of users in DCS got - a non-force-sensing, moving stick with a way bigger radius - that breakout force (that got translated to a hardcoded deadzone in DCS) just kills it. For tiny corrections, you always have to go through the deadzone and it is hard to hit the correct spot. Curves can flatten that a bit but the deadzone is always there.

I hope ED at some point acknowledges and fixes that, maybe by having an additional option in the special tab to disable the breakout force/deadzone entirely. Thanks for working on the latency already!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
  • Solution

There is nothing more to really fix. We know from references that the value is 9 ms, and we are within 1 ms.

thank you 

  • Like 1

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a shame to hear that BN, I understand the realism aspect, but theres also a gameplay aspect here and quite frankly it flies noticeably worse than the F-18 or Mirage 2000. I wonder if most people just dont notice it. For me, I do a lot of formation flying so something like this is very noticeable with all the fine movements I make. 👍

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the above poster here,

This built in deadzone is creating lots of difficulties to people that have normal joysticks, it would be completely fine if we all had force feeeback sticks but 99% doesn't have those. Because of that we are having problems making precise movement cause we don't exactly know when the jet will start responding, and force applied to move the PC joystick is always the same so we have no sensation on how fast the jet will respond on our inputs. With FFB, as I understand, the harder you pull the more response you get, we don't have that feeling with PC stick.

This might be great for FFB users but for most people flying F-16 it is not great.

Why can't there be option to switch like Apache has? It has FFB friendly option, and 2 more options,

is it possible to make such selections for F-16?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i support that point. an option to choose would be beneficial. having switched from a "conventional" stick - that was great all around - to a FSSB did improve the "feel" of flying the viper in ways i cant explain. i just feels so much better, more agile and more responsive.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the above poster here,
This built in deadzone is creating lots of difficulties to people that have normal joysticks, it would be completely fine if we all had force feeeback sticks but 99% doesn't have those. Because of that we are having problems making precise movement cause we don't exactly know when the jet will start responding, and force applied to move the PC joystick is always the same so we have no sensation on how fast the jet will respond on our inputs. With FFB, as I understand, the harder you pull the more response you get, we don't have that feeling with PC stick.
This might be great for FFB users but for most people flying F-16 it is not great.
Why can't there be option to switch like Apache has? It has FFB friendly option, and 2 more options,
is it possible to make such selections for F-16?
I agree with you. But you are confusing Force Feedback with Force Sensing.
Cheers!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Furiz said:

I agree with the above poster here,

This built in deadzone is creating lots of difficulties to people that have normal joysticks, it would be completely fine if we all had force feeeback sticks but 99% doesn't have those. Because of that we are having problems making precise movement cause we don't exactly know when the jet will start responding, and force applied to move the PC joystick is always the same so we have no sensation on how fast the jet will respond on our inputs. With FFB, as I understand, the harder you pull the more response you get, we don't have that feeling with PC stick.

This might be great for FFB users but for most people flying F-16 it is not great.

Why can't there be option to switch like Apache has? It has FFB friendly option, and 2 more options,

is it possible to make such selections for F-16?

It's a nitpick, but it's necessary to get things correct. FFB (Force Feedback) and Force Sensing (like FSSB from Real Simulator and how actual Viper stick works) are two completely different things. Currently even users with the FFB bases have same issues as ones with the the cam/spring bases. Please, do not mix those together as it can add confusion 🙂

What we likely need is Force Sensing base friendly and Sprung base friendly controls set, although how easy it's done I'm not sure.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

I agree with you. But you are confusing Force Feedback with Force Sensing.
Cheers!

 

1 hour ago, Vakarian said:

It's a nitpick, but it's necessary to get things correct. FFB (Force Feedback) and Force Sensing (like FSSB from Real Simulator and how actual Viper stick works) are two completely different things. Currently even users with the FFB bases have same issues as ones with the the cam/spring bases. Please, do not mix those together as it can add confusion 🙂

What we likely need is Force Sensing base friendly and Sprung base friendly controls set, although how easy it's done I'm not sure.

Yeah, sorry, my bad since I don't use it so I mixed things up 🙂

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...