PDA

View Full Version : Joystick sensitivity dramatically changes simulation experience.



Metatron_123
12-18-2011, 04:42 PM
Ok this may have been discussed before to some point, but this is what I found:

The P-51 is a pain in the butt to use with the standard joystick sensitivity.
Legendary test pilot Eric Brown has played this game and found the controls too sensitive (and so has a Finish fighter ace apparently) which makes sense to me, seeing as controls were mechanical, and further because I don't remember reading a pilot account about the P-51 being a pain in the arse to fly.

However Eric Brown's settings seem to overcompensate too much, to the point where you can't react with any sort of urgency when under attack, or while trying to recover from a spin. In fact his settings for elevators and ailerons only go up to around 30%.

I seem to have found a compromise, with a curve that goes up to about the mid sixties. Now, with this curve, the Mustang is very pleasant to fly, and it is easier to keep steady while you are building up speed, but something like the Bf-109 is extremely hard to maneuver. (Of course this reflects reality at high speeds at least).

Now, this brings me to another conundrum: Do joystick settings dramatically alter flight characteristics?

Or does this imply that the variables involved are so many, including individual strength, joystick length and possible leverage in the confines of a particular cockpit, that it boils down to personal preference?

I would assume that for point *****s online, going up to 100% sensitivity is obligatory. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Bearcat99
12-19-2011, 08:43 PM
Originally posted by Metatron_123:
Ok this may have been discussed before to some point, but this is what I found:

The P-51 is a pain in the butt to use with the standard joystick sensitivity.
Legendary test pilot Eric Brown has played this game and found the controls too sensitive (and so has a Finish fighter ace apparently) which makes sense to me, seeing as controls were mechanical, and further because I don't remember reading a pilot account about the P-51 being a pain in the arse to fly.

However Eric Brown's settings seem to overcompensate too much, to the point where you can't react with any sort of urgency when under attack, or while trying to recover from a spin. In fact his settings for elevators and ailerons only go up to around 30%.

I seem to have found a compromise, with a curve that goes up to about the mid sixties. Now, with this curve, the Mustang is very pleasant to fly, and it is easier to keep steady while you are building up speed, but something like the Bf-109 is extremely hard to maneuver. (Of course this reflects reality at high speeds at least).

Now, this brings me to another conundrum: Do joystick settings dramatically alter flight characteristics?

Or does this imply that the variables involved are so many, including individual strength, joystick length and possible leverage in the confines of a particular cockpit, that it boils down to personal preference?

I would assume that for point *****s online, going up to 100% sensitivity is obligatory. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

By standard I guess you mean the 10-100 in increments of 10 .. perhaps default would be a better term because really there is no "standard" setting..

I recall many pilots saying that it was not so much a pain in the arse to fly but that it wasn't easy to fly. I think the best term to use wold be a challenge .. and a lot of that depended on how much fuel you had in the fuselage tank.. which of course is not modeled too well in this sim.

Absolutely ...

That as you have said depends on the plane .. because with certain planes at 100% across the board they will be more target drones than point *****s ... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

JtD
12-20-2011, 03:02 AM
Your joystick has like 20% the travel of a real stick and needs less than 10% the forces it is trying to simulate. It's only natural that the planes seem to be very responsive and nervous.

I also have a joystick profile I occasionally use for flying very responsive aircraft, like the Spitfire or P-51. Gives the whole thing a much nicer feel - and it still is competitive online.

K_Freddie
12-20-2011, 03:15 AM
The game only becomes a joy to 'fly' with all settings on 100. This is where you feel the a/c modelling... just like any real a/c.

You can do some mean stuff at 100s

RegRag1977
12-20-2011, 03:31 AM
Originally posted by Metatron_123:

Now, this brings me to another conundrum: Do joystick settings dramatically alter flight characteristics?

I would assume that for point *****s online, going up to 100% sensitivity is obligatory. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Absolutely true, you will get more in terms of improvement (trajectory smoothness, aim accuracy) by spending (boring) time on the joystick curve board or programs (joycontrol) than in actual flight.Also the stick programming is very important. This is sometimes what new players tend to neglect.

The feeling is very important for self confidence, because it gives you confidence in the aircraft.

What is more is also about the stick you use, and the devices you use for your axis (not talking about PC and intenet connexion) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif . A cheap stick won't be that accurate and will give you less smoothness, less "linearity", and often it will be shorter and thus be less precise. That really counts in the end, and i guess this is the reason why many online players cannot land some aircraft correctly, apart from training failure: with a cheap device or with a badly calibrated and good joystick, there's not much you can learn, and you tend to reach the limit of what is doable very soon, tending to fly the same bad way everytime without the possibility to improve much . Fact is people often talk about tactics, maneuvers, skill, but tend to forget that you cannot have skill or reach performance (even do some maneuvers!) without the proper tool, in this case also with a properly calibrated tool.

For instance, you can have your rudder axis on a twist stick, which can be good for aiming (only in some cases) but in general less good in some maneuvers (banking and adding rudder). You can have an extra smooth rudder by using a rotary in the place of pedals or twist: along with the elevator trim slider you can have the best aiming accuracy (using their precision to make micro adjustments that would be far less precise with 'only' stick and pedals (best combo, also more demanding in terms of body coordination for the occasional player, rudder aiming precisely with you feet, that's a totally different job!) for instance. I'm sure there may even be some programming options to switch axis and their sensitivity in the flight http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif . There's so much possibilities...Some are very precise, but can kill the immersion for some, it's all about taste, and also about what you want to get out of this game. There's no bad way to play and to have fun.

This game looked more and more like a F1 car setting through time if you see what i mean http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif , it's sometimes closer to that than to an actual WW2 sim (even if it is still the best). That fact may be the reason to be of the new CloD realism option (IIRC the one that forbids to use too many axis at the same time, which is a great idea BTW).

Still you will have to know your bird, but knowing that only won't help to have success. It is not just getting used to your AC, it is all about getting used to your gear, and about taking a lot of time setting it. This is the most important thing in this game to become very good, and this is why few good pilot talk about it, they prefer to talk about performance, tactics, maneuvers, planes http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Many players are whining because they really do as good as possible, but that is with their gear, and in the way it is calibrated and programmed, and this won't be enough online where some very good pilots i know personnaly have actually taken years of testing to refine their gear!

mortoma
12-21-2011, 01:50 PM
I tried Eric Brown's settings but I quickly tired of not having up elevator force to make a nice landing, no matter how much up I trimmed up. And that was in just about any plane too.

Really, what Eric was experiencing more than anything is that the typical throw of a real stick in aircraft of the period is far more than a joystick due to its length being far longer than a joystick. If you tied a wooden stick about two feet long to your joystick and then tried to fly, you'd see what I mean.

Needless to say, I now ignore Eric's opinion on this subject and I changed it back a long time ago to the necessarily faster and more reactive settings.

More importantly, if you try to get the turn time in any given plane that it should have using Brown's settings, you won't get quite as fast of a turn. And most turn times are historical. So if you are supposed to get a 18 second turn time in say a 109G2 but only get around in about 23 seconds, then how can Brown's settings be right? I mean if the real 109GS could turn a full circle in 18 or so seconds, which historically it could. This is where Brown's opinion falls apart, I'm afraid....sorry http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Bearcat99
12-21-2011, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by K_Freddie:
The game only becomes a joy to 'fly' with all settings on 100. This is where you feel the a/c modelling... just like any real a/c.

You can do some mean stuff at 100s

You are kidding right?

BillyTheKid_22
12-21-2011, 03:49 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

K_Freddie
01-01-2012, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K_Freddie:
The game only becomes a joy to 'fly' with all settings on 100. This is where you feel the a/c modelling... just like any real a/c.

You can do some mean stuff at 100s

You are kidding right? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You should try it... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
You know when some aces talk about being 'one with their aircraft'... 100s place you right in that ballpark.
Every little 'twitch' on the stick/rudder can have superb or disasterous results.. this depends on how awake you are. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
It's like being permanently on the edge.. which is essentially flying a 'high performance' fighter.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

K_Freddie
01-01-2012, 02:28 PM
As an excercise as I know you like your P51 (which is a lot more twitchy than a FW190)

Take it on a 'flip' and at a slow enough speed so as not to break the wings, just yank the stick backwards - you'll go into an immediate stall.

Now do the same thing again, but apply opposite rudder to control the stall - You might find yourself pushing the rudder L&R to stabilise the plane while holding the stick back. While doing this you must only focus directly ahead and outside the pit - IOW feel the a/c attitude and reaction.

This is control at 100s - takes a bit of practise.
One can say that you can do this with other stick settings...Sure, but the response time will probably not be enough to keep the a/c under control.
From what I can gather from flying different a/c, they all have their characteristic controls and anything below 100s is 'dumbing' down the relative controls, which is fine if you prefer that, but I think the reality of any a/c FM lies at 100s
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Lurch1962
01-26-2012, 01:49 AM
I've done a fair bit of experimenting with joystick response curves. The four important aspects I've discovered:

1) The curve must terminate at 100%. In other words, for the point corresponding to the physical stick's end-of-travel, the reported deflection must be full. This is to ensure that when the stick in your hand is fully deflected, the virtual deflection is also full. If less, you'll obtain sub-par performance and will needlessly handicap yourself. It would be like installing a range-of-travel limiter directly to the control surface!

2) At the entrant point of the curve, its value should be that which provides sufficient response but at the same time not result in overshooting the desired virtual deflection during the more exciting moments. This is most important for the elevator. In my case, the entrant point (after the initial zero) is a quite low 4. Any higher and I find that I'm 'porpoising' up and down while trying to hold pitch during shooting.

3) Keep dead zones to ZERO(!), or as small as you can possibly tolerate. If your stick has clean response (no 'noisy' pots), a null dead zone means that you always have instant, smooth and gradual stick response all the way down to the center. Personally, I despise having a noticeably large dead zone at center, only to have the control surface suddenly deflect a significant amount as soon as the stick crosses the defined threshold. No dead zone means instant and fine response at all times.

4) Keep filtering as low as possible. Unless your stick has absolutely clean pots, a little filtering will likely help. A junk stick may require aggressive filtering, but then this will induce hysteresis, or lag in response.


So. Make sure your stick is calibrated. Set all curves to terminate at 100. Then set what feels right to you and also allows good response without wild overshooting in control.

italianofalco
01-26-2012, 05:09 PM
100% final ramp set is good just only for rudder and aleron control. For elevator there is a IL2 bug (at least related to MS-FFB joystick) then you have to set last column of setting not over 80% as to have green square into the definite limit of field path, if you overset the range going to cover the red square that is at the end of the path BUT out of field range then every plane you fly tend always to be undrivable. just my 2 cent.