PDA

View Full Version : Stepping inputs on stick/X52



AVGWarhawk
01-30-2007, 06:55 PM
Ok please hear me out before you make your claim.
DISCLAIMER:

THIS CONCERNS THE SAITEC X52 AND X45. IT WORKED FOR ME AND MIGHT WORK FOR YOU. I USE THE TWIST STICK VERSION. IT IS POSSIBLE IT MIGHT WORK ON OTHER STICKS AS WELL. THIS IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM WILL THIS 'DEFINITLY' CURE ANY ILLS YOU MIGHT BE EXPERIENCING WITH YOU SAITEC AND PLAYABILITY OF THE GAME. ON THE OTHER HAND IT MIGHT MAKE THE GAME MUCH MORE ENJOYABLE FOR YOU. AGAIN, THIS IS FOR THE X52/45 WITH TWIST STICK. IF YOU OWN A COUGAR/CH/LOGITEC OR ANY OTHER BRAND, ATTEMPT THE SETTINGS AT YOU OWN RISK(YOU CAN ALWAYS CHANGE BACK). THESE SETTING DO NOT CONTAIN ANY SCIENTIFIC BACK UP OTHER THAN TESTING AND TUNING. THROW OF STICK, POTS, LINEAR, PHOTO OPTIC, PERCENT OF VALUE CHANGE WITHIN THE STICK WAS NOT CONSIDERED NOR DID I CARE ABOUT THESE FOR THIS SETTING BECAUSE IT WORKED AND WORKED WELL. NO NEED TO DISECT MY STICK AND BREAK OUT THE VOLT METER AND GET HARD DATA ON THE INNER WORKINGS OF THE STICK. IT IS JUST THE COMMON MANS APPROACH IN PLUGGING IN SOME VALUES ON THE IL SLIDER INPUT SCREEN THAT CURED MY ILLS WHILE USING THE X52 AND PLAYABLITY OF THE AIRCRAFT. THESE SETTINGS DO NOT GUARANTEE SUCCESS AND BETTER KILL RATIO. THESE SETINGS DO NOT STOP STD.

Concerning your stick inputs in the game should run like this:

Roll: 100-100-100-100-100 all the way
Pitch: 65-65-65-65-65 all the way This can can tweek down to 58 up to 72
Yaw: 100-100-100-100-100 all the way

Does not seem logical does it? Now, your stick is already calibrated for steps in deflection of your flying surfaces. This is how the stick is manufactured. With this setting you are limiting the deflection of pitch,roll and yaw for your stick. With this setting, my deflection will go up gradually to 100 as my limit for these are set for that value. In game, I watched as my elevators etc move with my stick and did it gradually until it hit my limit I set. No stepping was set up in the game input screen. Now, you are wondering why I'm stating this? Easy, all my planes were stalling in hard turns and flat spins. Reducing the pitch value allows better control but it limits my stick in deflection and keeps me from stalling and flat spin. It almost seemed my stick was fighting gradual deflection that it already has and the deflection values you set in the game.

The Tempest is just about unflyable using the step adjustment in the input screen within the game. This plane is great with these settings. All the others are great flyers with these settings.

The only adjustment you will need to tweek to your taste is the pitch and I recommend you stay between 69-85 and use the same value across the board for the others sliders (100%).

Take a minute and change your settings to these and give it a go. The worst that can happen is you don't like them so change back.

Hopefully you see the logic in this. Furthermore, my squadmate changed settings over a three day period(yes, all day trust me on that)and came up with this set up.

I use an X52. These work great!

AVGWarhawk
01-30-2007, 06:55 PM
Ok please hear me out before you make your claim.
DISCLAIMER:

THIS CONCERNS THE SAITEC X52 AND X45. IT WORKED FOR ME AND MIGHT WORK FOR YOU. I USE THE TWIST STICK VERSION. IT IS POSSIBLE IT MIGHT WORK ON OTHER STICKS AS WELL. THIS IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM WILL THIS 'DEFINITLY' CURE ANY ILLS YOU MIGHT BE EXPERIENCING WITH YOU SAITEC AND PLAYABILITY OF THE GAME. ON THE OTHER HAND IT MIGHT MAKE THE GAME MUCH MORE ENJOYABLE FOR YOU. AGAIN, THIS IS FOR THE X52/45 WITH TWIST STICK. IF YOU OWN A COUGAR/CH/LOGITEC OR ANY OTHER BRAND, ATTEMPT THE SETTINGS AT YOU OWN RISK(YOU CAN ALWAYS CHANGE BACK). THESE SETTING DO NOT CONTAIN ANY SCIENTIFIC BACK UP OTHER THAN TESTING AND TUNING. THROW OF STICK, POTS, LINEAR, PHOTO OPTIC, PERCENT OF VALUE CHANGE WITHIN THE STICK WAS NOT CONSIDERED NOR DID I CARE ABOUT THESE FOR THIS SETTING BECAUSE IT WORKED AND WORKED WELL. NO NEED TO DISECT MY STICK AND BREAK OUT THE VOLT METER AND GET HARD DATA ON THE INNER WORKINGS OF THE STICK. IT IS JUST THE COMMON MANS APPROACH IN PLUGGING IN SOME VALUES ON THE IL SLIDER INPUT SCREEN THAT CURED MY ILLS WHILE USING THE X52 AND PLAYABLITY OF THE AIRCRAFT. THESE SETTINGS DO NOT GUARANTEE SUCCESS AND BETTER KILL RATIO. THESE SETINGS DO NOT STOP STD.

Concerning your stick inputs in the game should run like this:

Roll: 100-100-100-100-100 all the way
Pitch: 65-65-65-65-65 all the way This can can tweek down to 58 up to 72
Yaw: 100-100-100-100-100 all the way

Does not seem logical does it? Now, your stick is already calibrated for steps in deflection of your flying surfaces. This is how the stick is manufactured. With this setting you are limiting the deflection of pitch,roll and yaw for your stick. With this setting, my deflection will go up gradually to 100 as my limit for these are set for that value. In game, I watched as my elevators etc move with my stick and did it gradually until it hit my limit I set. No stepping was set up in the game input screen. Now, you are wondering why I'm stating this? Easy, all my planes were stalling in hard turns and flat spins. Reducing the pitch value allows better control but it limits my stick in deflection and keeps me from stalling and flat spin. It almost seemed my stick was fighting gradual deflection that it already has and the deflection values you set in the game.

The Tempest is just about unflyable using the step adjustment in the input screen within the game. This plane is great with these settings. All the others are great flyers with these settings.

The only adjustment you will need to tweek to your taste is the pitch and I recommend you stay between 69-85 and use the same value across the board for the others sliders (100%).

Take a minute and change your settings to these and give it a go. The worst that can happen is you don't like them so change back.

Hopefully you see the logic in this. Furthermore, my squadmate changed settings over a three day period(yes, all day trust me on that)and came up with this set up.

I use an X52. These work great!

MrMojok
01-30-2007, 06:58 PM
My x-52 is getting a little bit loosey-goosey and I'm afraid with the 100s I'd be flopping all over the place. I have yet to find a satisfactory object to stick between the handle and spring to firm it up. Maybe I could set some deadzone or something.

AVGWarhawk
01-30-2007, 07:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MrMojok:
My x-52 is getting a little bit loosey-goosey and I'm afraid with the 100s I'd be flopping all over the place. I have yet to find a satisfactory object to stick between the handle and spring to firm it up. Maybe I could set some deadzone or something. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Some have put a large washer under the spring to stop the flopping stick. At any rate, the logic here is this. Your plane flops because the roll is not limited enough. Try these settings and I think you will be happy with them. I thought this was nuts also but again, your stick does the gradual deflection rate automatically, you are just setting the limit it will go too. Try and see!

ElAurens
01-30-2007, 10:04 PM
With 100 across for pitch I cannot aim smoothly at all.

Since I almost never fly the FW 190 I see no need to limit roll.

I use rudder pedals and have no need for yaw adjustments, nor are they even possible.

CH Fighterstick USB. Pro Throttle USB, Pro Pedals USB.

Von_Rat
01-31-2007, 02:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">nor are they even possible. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

are you sure about that?

do you have the control manager installed?

AVGWarhawk
01-31-2007, 05:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
With 100 across for pitch I cannot aim smoothly at all.

Since I almost never fly the FW 190 I see no need to limit roll.

I use rudder pedals and have no need for yaw adjustments, nor are they even possible.

CH Fighterstick USB. Pro Throttle USB, Pro Pedals USB. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Limiting roll prevents stalling on tight turns. You hit a threshold that the plane will fly once beyond that threshold it creates a stall. I limit roll for all aircraft. Adjustment for your peddles can be done within the game input settings if you pedals do not already create a set degree automatically. As far as pitch, I had the same issue of holding steady until I moved my values as stated in the original post.

ElAurens
01-31-2007, 05:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
do you have the control manager installed? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have yet to see the need for that counter intuitive, clunky piece of software in a prop sim. The only thing I would like to use is the mini-joystick on the throttle, but fighting that silly CH Contol Manager is not worth it. When I first got the CH stuff I tried in vain to figure out how to use it. Far too complex to set up, and not really necessary when all assignments can be made in game easily. And I don't like the idea of having another process running in the background anyway.

I have been thinking about ripping the mini stick out and adding a rotary for trim.

anarchy52
01-31-2007, 05:26 AM
numbers are not % deflection, they are % of max force that can be applied by pilot.

AVGWarhawk
01-31-2007, 05:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by anarchy52:
numbers are not % deflection, they are % of max force that can be applied by pilot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correct. So I limit the roll rate only and this prevents flat spin and stall when turning. the other values give me the opportunity to go 100% but these surfaces will go as far as my hand tells them too when using the stick. If pull back a little my elevators go up, a little. If I pull back hard my stick will react to 100%. The theshold on roll I diminish because anything beyond 72 creates stall and flat spin.

WB_Outlaw
01-31-2007, 05:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
the other values give me the opportunity to go 100% but these surfaces will go as far as my hand tells them too when using the stick. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is incorrect. If it takes 40lbs of force to reach a certain deflection and you are limiting yourself to 32.5lbs, then you will never be able to reach that deflection.

Roll doesn't create stalls, angle of attack does and AoA is controlled by pitch. It's your 100% across the board pitch settings that are creating the stalls. The ailerons and rudder will increase the tendancy to enter a spin during a stall but not cause the stall.

You don't have to use 100% across the board to be able to apply the full 50lbs of force. All you need is 100% at the end for that. I find 100% across the board for pitch results in a very twitchy pitch response and difficulty aiming. With an exponential pitch setting you get softer inputs near the center for fine control and larger input near the edge for really haulin' back when you need to.

A low end stick (ie 8 bit A/D converter) will also increase the tendency to stall due to the larger incremental force inputs.

--Outlaw.

WB_Outlaw
01-31-2007, 06:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
I use rudder pedals and have no need for yaw adjustments, nor are they even possible.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you mean adjustable like roll and pitch you are wrong. Every analog axis is adjustable. My rudder inputs are massively limited near the center.

--Outlaw.

Vanderstok
01-31-2007, 06:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
Roll doesn't create stalls, angle of attack does and AoA is controlled by pitch. It's your 100% across the board pitch settings that are creating the stalls. The ailerons and rudder will increase the tendancy to enter a spin during a stall but not cause the stall.

You don't have to use 100% across the board to be able to apply the full 50lbs of force. All you need is 100% at the end for that. I find 100% across the board for pitch results in a very twitchy pitch response and difficulty aiming. With an exponential pitch setting you get softer inputs near the center for fine control and larger input near the edge for really haulin' back when you need to.

A low end stick (ie 8 bit A/D converter) will also increase the tendency to stall due to the larger incremental force inputs.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correct.

Use this little util. It will give you a good understanding of how the input values of the controls are translated to the outputvalues as used in the game:

http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=1021

rnzoli
01-31-2007, 06:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
A low end stick (ie 8 bit A/D converter) will also increase the tendency to stall due to the larger incremental force inputs. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Outlaw, do you happen to know the resolution of mid-range sticks like X-45 and X-52, or the high end sticks like CH's? Do they all have 10-bit A/D?

WB_Outlaw
01-31-2007, 07:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rnzoli:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
A low end stick (ie 8 bit A/D converter) will also increase the tendency to stall due to the larger incremental force inputs. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Outlaw, do you happen to know the resolution of mid-range sticks like X-45 and X-52, or the high end sticks like CH's? Do they all have 10-bit A/D? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know the X-52 is 10 bit on the stick, not sure about the throttle/rudder/brakes but I can check later today. I'm about to leave for an interview so I can't do it now.

If you go into the stick calibration and check the "show raw values" check box that MIGHT tell you the resolution, but, some sticks (like the Cougar) interpolate that value to something much higher. I don't think the X-52's custom stick properties sheet allow this though.

I do know that a Logitech extreme is 8 bit b/c I just threw one away because it was useless with such poor A/D.

I'll have some more info later if no one else jumps in.

--Outlaw.

rnzoli
01-31-2007, 07:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I do know that a Logitech extreme is 8 bit b/c I just threw one away because it was useless with such poor A/D. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>All right, thanks, that't interesting because I think the MS Sidewinder Precision 2 stick also has 8-bit A/D http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Sidewinder-Precision-2-Joystick/dp/B00005NIMA
I supposed "precision" comes with better A/D converter...

Sometimes hard to belive all the BS the manufacturers say, while they keep the A/D conversion precision as secret. I looked at Saitek's site several times, simply couldn't find this information in their product descriptions or manuals. I always wondered, why.

CarpeNoctem43
01-31-2007, 08:25 AM
Warhawk, you have my undivided attention. At this point I am willing to try just about anything.

I deal with the stalls and spins too much. It gets so bad that I have the settings for pitch ranging from 5% to 87% in a curved fashion and I still stall often and now a 109G can out turn me in an La-7. (not really, but it feels that bad anymore)

I know a lot of my problems are my skills (or lack of), but there has to be a starting point somewhere.

At any rate, like others here I am quite sceptical about these settings. Could it be that your playing level is to such a point that it is NOT the settings accountable for success?

Maybe you've programmed your stick along the pitch axis with it's own curve???

What other factors are involved with your particular successes? Are you heavy on the stick or do you finesse it?

I really appreciate this thread, I will try it, but as the others, I have doubts as to my success with the setup.

-Rick

WWMaxGunz
01-31-2007, 10:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
the other values give me the opportunity to go 100% but these surfaces will go as far as my hand tells them too when using the stick. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is incorrect. If it takes 40lbs of force to reach a certain deflection and you are limiting yourself to 32.5lbs, then you will never be able to reach that deflection.

Roll doesn't create stalls, angle of attack does and AoA is controlled by pitch. It's your 100% across the board pitch settings that are creating the stalls. The ailerons and rudder will increase the tendancy to enter a spin during a stall but not cause the stall.

You don't have to use 100% across the board to be able to apply the full 50lbs of force. All you need is 100% at the end for that. I find 100% across the board for pitch results in a very twitchy pitch response and difficulty aiming. With an exponential pitch setting you get softer inputs near the center for fine control and larger input near the edge for really haulin' back when you need to.

A low end stick (ie 8 bit A/D converter) will also increase the tendency to stall due to the larger incremental force inputs.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are really missing understanding on the meaning of the sliders.

You go across slider bands at 10, 20, 30,...100 and each has a slider, correct?
If the 100 slider (full joystick deflect) is at 100 then you get the full pilot strength.
If the 10 slider is at 100 then for that you get 10% pilot strength.

You can easily see this for yourself by the box at left side when you adjust the sliders,
just move your stick and watch the red and green blocks.

But still actual IRL stick forces are not linear so if you have linear strength by all
sliders the same then you have poor control. And while I used to be able to say from game
tests about how backforces affect your control I have not checked 4.07. Try climbing
steeply while holding your joystick steady and pan view down to watch the virtual stick.
It was that on a very steep but maintained climb I would watch that stick, the one that
had pilot strength and changing control backforces at work on, it would wobble.

Consider this that non-feedback joystick is pilot strength yes, but in direction away from
center only. That is a PHYSICAL HARDWARE LIMITATION. Unless the handling changes of 4.07
somehow have a way around this (just because I can't imagine how does not mean there is no
way) then it is still the same, pilot pulls stick with bungee cord -- control is limited
to elastic/dynamic in changing backforce situations. Perhaps backforces are modulated now
with time (as Filter) or something else, the planes handle better but given the method of
modelling there is only so far and then control is crippled. Just think and remember that
this way is at least as real as the other way of joystick position = control deflection and
more real in more ways than that.
Sorry but with computer and hardware the disjoint to reality is made. Software only tries
to bring some reality to it. You want all pilots are the Terminator? How real is that?

WWMaxGunz
01-31-2007, 10:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CarpeNoctem43:
Warhawk, you have my undivided attention. At this point I am willing to try just about anything.

I deal with the stalls and spins too much. It gets so bad that I have the settings for pitch ranging from 5% to 87% in a curved fashion and I still stall often and now a 109G can out turn me in an La-7. (not really, but it feels that bad anymore)

I know a lot of my problems are my skills (or lack of), but there has to be a starting point somewhere.

At any rate, like others here I am quite sceptical about these settings. Could it be that your playing level is to such a point that it is NOT the settings accountable for success?

Maybe you've programmed your stick along the pitch axis with it's own curve???

What other factors are involved with your particular successes? Are you heavy on the stick or do you finesse it?

I really appreciate this thread, I will try it, but as the others, I have doubts as to my success with the setup.

-Rick </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you keeping your plane out of slip, especially in turns?
If so are you watching your speed and relaxing the stick if you slow down?

If your idea of flying is to react instantly and pull harder because you are being turned
inside then your mistakes have only caught up with you at that point.

Von_Rat
01-31-2007, 10:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">When I first got the CH stuff I tried in vain to figure out how to use it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


if all else fails, you can always try reading the instructions. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif


seriously though, but since you mentioned mini stick. among other things i used the control manager to set up my ministick for emergancy elevator trim. if i need lets say full up elevator trim, i just grap mini with my thumb, then all i have to do is to let go, for trim to go back to neutral.

since i fly bnz planes mostly, i almost never use this. but its nice to have if i feel like tnbing on a arcade server.

AVGWarhawk
01-31-2007, 11:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
the other values give me the opportunity to go 100% but these surfaces will go as far as my hand tells them too when using the stick. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is incorrect. If it takes 40lbs of force to reach a certain deflection and you are limiting yourself to 32.5lbs, then you will never be able to reach that deflection.

Roll doesn't create stalls, angle of attack does and AoA is controlled by pitch. It's your 100% across the board pitch settings that are creating the stalls. The ailerons and rudder will increase the tendancy to enter a spin during a stall but not cause the stall.

You don't have to use 100% across the board to be able to apply the full 50lbs of force. All you need is 100% at the end for that. I find 100% across the board for pitch results in a very twitchy pitch response and difficulty aiming. With an exponential pitch setting you get softer inputs near the center for fine control and larger input near the edge for really haulin' back when you need to.

A low end stick (ie 8 bit A/D converter) will also increase the tendency to stall due to the larger incremental force inputs.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your point one, this is a game and not real life physics no matter how you would like to explain it.

Your point two, yes angle of attack creates stall....real life data....again this is a game.

My point is this. Your stick is already stepping adjustments as you move it across it's band. Then you are asking the game to run it own inputs you have put in. This is not needed. Leave the ingame settings as stated above and let the stick do the stepped adjustments. Yes, some have said it is two twitchy. More have stated it is better. All you can do is give it a try and see if it works for you. I'm simply trying to invite others into make a stick input that make the game very playable....after all it is a game made up of colors and numbers.

As far as the lower end sticks, these settings should help cure that problem. I'm quite certain of that....my $29.00 EVO is just as good as my $110.00 X52.

AVGWarhawk
01-31-2007, 11:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CarpeNoctem43:
Warhawk, you have my undivided attention. At this point I am willing to try just about anything.

I deal with the stalls and spins too much. It gets so bad that I have the settings for pitch ranging from 5% to 87% in a curved fashion and I still stall often and now a 109G can out turn me in an La-7. (not really, but it feels that bad anymore)

I know a lot of my problems are my skills (or lack of), but there has to be a starting point somewhere.

At any rate, like others here I am quite sceptical about these settings. Could it be that your playing level is to such a point that it is NOT the settings accountable for success?

Maybe you've programmed your stick along the pitch axis with it's own curve???

What other factors are involved with your particular successes? Are you heavy on the stick or do you finesse it?

I really appreciate this thread, I will try it, but as the others, I have doubts as to my success with the setup.

-Rick </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have not played the game in over 6 months. I have been messing with SH3. I got 1946 and loaded it up. My beloved P40 just was stall happy. The P51 worse yet. I did my old stepping adjustment in the game for the stick and it got better but I was ready to head back to my Uboat. After applying the values noted above...all my ills were solved. Give it a go. What can it hurt? Nothing at all. What can you gain? Decent game play and good night sleep!!

I'm not heavy on the stick. My stick is not programmable that I'm aware of. All I know is this, 6 squadmates use this and love it. I have watched outside views and although my rudder is maxed at 100% it still moves as my hand twists the stick little by little until my stick has reached my turning radius and the 100% I dialed in. Your biggest concern is the roll values and what your comfortable with.

WB_Outlaw
01-31-2007, 11:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
You are really missing understanding on the meaning of the sliders.

If the 100 slider (full joystick deflect) is at 100 then you get the full pilot strength.
If the 10 slider is at 100 then for that you get 10% pilot strength.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, I'm not misunderstanding anything considering your post is simply a restatement of what I said about only needing the last 10% of physical travel set to 100% to get full pilot strength.

To calculate the force exerted on the virtual stick at any physical travel that is a multiple of 10%, use the following equaion....

(PhysicalTravel/100)*(SliderPosition/100)*50

So, if your 30% physical travel slider is set to 50% you will exert 7.5 lbs (0.3*0.5*50) of force when you pull back 30% on your physical stick. To get values between multiples of 10% physical travel I assume that the game interpolates between two settings.

--Outlaw.

WB_Outlaw
01-31-2007, 12:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
I have watched outside views and although my rudder is maxed at 100% it still moves as my hand twists the stick little by little until my stick has reached my turning radius and the 100% I dialed in. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

To see the force response in action, set all your pitch sliders to 5%. Jump in a 109 and note the amount of deflection you see in an external view while sitting motionless on the ground. Then take off, get plenty of alt, and then dive straight down until you reach ludicrous speed (but less than the disentigration speed). Jump to an external view and check the amount of deflection you see when you pull back on the stick all the way.

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
01-31-2007, 12:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
I have watched outside views and although my rudder is maxed at 100% it still moves as my hand twists the stick little by little until my stick has reached my turning radius and the 100% I dialed in. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

To see the force response in action, set all your pitch sliders to 5%. Jump in a 109 and note the amount of deflection you see in an external view while sitting motionless on the ground. Then take off, get plenty of alt, and then dive straight down until you reach ludicrous speed (but less than the disentigration speed). Jump to an external view and check the amount of deflection you see when you pull back on the stick all the way.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have seen this for sure!! But not now with 1946. With my pitch roll yaw set in the game as stated above, I do not see the rudder going a full 100% with a tiny twist. It runs it course as I slowly turn my stick, same with the other moving surfaces until they hit the desired value I set in the game. I remember the days when you turned your stick just a little and if you were at 100%...bam...the rudder would go to 100% no matter how little you turned your stick. This brought in the stepping idea. But today, with 1946, I see the stick stepping itself as go through the movements. This is with the settings I have showing above.

BlitzPig_DDT
01-31-2007, 12:25 PM
If you have a stick with a length roughly equal to what was in the aircraft, you can use 100's more effectively. It's still not dead on because, as noted, the physical stick signifies pilot strength, not virtual stick deflection.

Oleg himself stated that the reason for the sliders was that 1) PC sticks are all different, and 2) PC sticks are usually quite short. Too short to produce the desired results with any sort of fixed curve, and especially not all 100's.

If I ever get around to building my Cougar handle extension, I'll move the sliders back up.

Real experience from people across the board (pun intended), shows that moving the sliders up too high results in stall-happy behavior.

Just as a side note, the only people I know personally that use all 100s are more gamers than virtual pilots. They are successful, but they use ever "trick" they can to maximize their success, not their simming experience. (and they often have basic sticks too)

WWMaxGunz
01-31-2007, 12:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
You are really missing understanding on the meaning of the sliders.

If the 100 slider (full joystick deflect) is at 100 then you get the full pilot strength.
If the 10 slider is at 100 then for that you get 10% pilot strength.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, I'm not misunderstanding anything considering your post is simply a restatement of what I said about only needing the last 10% of physical travel set to 100% to get full pilot strength.

To calculate the force exerted on the virtual stick at any physical travel that is a multiple of 10%, use the following equaion....

(PhysicalTravel/100)*(SliderPosition/100)*50

So, if your 30% physical travel slider is set to 50% you will exert 7.5 lbs (0.3*0.5*50) of force when you pull back 30% on your physical stick. To get values between multiples of 10% physical travel I assume that the game interpolates between two settings.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are correct, I misunderstood what you had written in another post. Sorry and you state
the true case better than I did.

KaleunFreddie
01-31-2007, 12:36 PM
This is what i use.. It's tuned for the FW190 and works like a dream. Works well with all other a/c too, but is limited in pitch, which you can work around.

Pitch - I want full response with reduction at the top end. This places you just within the stall zone.
http://www.vanjast.com/IL2Pics/Pitch.jpg

Roll - I want to take full advantage of the FW's roll rate
http://www.vanjast.com/IL2Pics/Roll.jpg

Yaw - I've disabled this as my pedals are broken. But usually the same as the Roll axis as you get a lot of recovery from sticky situations via your yaw response.
http://www.vanjast.com/IL2Pics/Yaw.jpg

Hope this helps.

Edit: Another point is that in RL, if you are fitter and have a stronger body structure, you can apply more force to the stick and rudder and achieve 100% values. All this hogwash about how you should fly the sim is wasted nonsense. You're here to max your chances of winning, as it is in RL. Do what you can to win (except cheat via file hacking) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

AVGWarhawk
01-31-2007, 12:46 PM
WOW AND EVERYONE THOUGHT I WAS JUST NUTS WITH MY INPUTS. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

So what I have stated is not so far fetched. Kaleun Freddie are we a SH3 captain? Thanks for your post on what you have. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

KaleunFreddie
01-31-2007, 12:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Kaleun Freddie are we a SH3 captain? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have a torpedo solution... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif... just busy with my Nav_Mod ..so haven't played for a while.

AVGWarhawk
01-31-2007, 12:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">ust as a side note, the only people I know personally that use all 100s are more gamers than virtual pilots. They are successful, but they use ever "trick" they can to maximize their success, not their simming experience. (and they often have basic sticks too) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just as a side note, this game is hardly what I would call sim at the very least getting to be arcade at best. It is not a matter of using every 'trick' in the book is a matter of enjoying the $60.00 you just spent on seemingly poor aircraft that can be corrected and enjoyable with attempting different settings on the stick. No matter how you look at it...it is a game and not any hardcore SIM....not even remotely close. There is so many factors missing it is just plain funny. There is thread after thread of engine performance. Come on man, they do not even attempt to simulate mass air pressure and ambient air temps that greatly affect engine performance. It is all just a little to grandios an idea that this remotely resembles how these aircraft had flow. Furthermore you are replicating it using numbers in a code. There is zero real outside naturally occurring physics that factor in to this game. This is my opinion and if you wish to believe it is a real the so do. If you believe it is as close as you can get at the real thing...then we agree. My belief...just a game in the end.

AVGWarhawk
01-31-2007, 12:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KaleunFreddie:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Kaleun Freddie are we a SH3 captain? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have a torpedo solution... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif... just busy with my Nav_Mod ..so haven't played for a while. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

AAAAALLLLLLAAAARRRRRMMM! There are too many crazies flying in this thread!! Silent/50 turns. depth 200m!!! For some reason I knew I should have stayed submerged on the subject of stick settings http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

KaleunFreddie
01-31-2007, 01:03 PM
Where's my Popcorn ?? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

AVGWarhawk
01-31-2007, 01:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KaleunFreddie:
Where's my Popcorn ?? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahh, finely a Kaleun who understands! These flyboys need to go into the depths! Thanks for your post Freddie. I really thought my settings were just plan nuts. I think you have taken the cake http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

KaleunFreddie
01-31-2007, 02:33 PM
Another quick note before I nod off.
Those settings above are a result of at least 3000+ hours(half at least online) in an FW190 over the past 5 years of IL2. Modified slightly with each patch update, so it's not from pulling the 'bunny out the hat'. It works well and is consistent in feel and flight.
It might be too oversensitive for some, but you get used to it.

Goodnight all..
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

Zoom2136
01-31-2007, 02:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MrMojok:
My x-52 is getting a little bit loosey-goosey and I'm afraid with the 100s I'd be flopping all over the place. I have yet to find a satisfactory object to stick between the handle and spring to firm it up. Maybe I could set some deadzone or something. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I used a ABS 1 1/2" end cap that I cut a slot in so that I can slid it under the handle (between the handle and the spring). The "lip" of the ABS cap was grinded down so that it would allow for full stick mouvement...

Hope this helps

RocketDog
01-31-2007, 03:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
No matter how you look at it...it is a game and not any hardcore SIM....not even remotely close. There is so many factors missing it is just plain funny. There is thread after thread of engine performance. Come on man, they do not even attempt to simulate mass air pressure and ambient air temps that greatly affect engine performance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In fact, IL-2 does simulate decreasing air pressure with height and different air temperatures and has done so since day 1. The former is one reason why aircraft performance changes dramatically with height. The latter is why you will overheat more easily on a desert map than a Russian winter one.

Overall, I would say that IL-2 simulates flight behaviour quite effectively, although it is a bit ropey around the stall. It does not simulate navigation, weather or engine managment particularly well (although the latter has got better over time).

Cheers,

RD.

BlitzPig_DDT
01-31-2007, 04:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RocketDog:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
No matter how you look at it...it is a game and not any hardcore SIM....not even remotely close. There is so many factors missing it is just plain funny. There is thread after thread of engine performance. Come on man, they do not even attempt to simulate mass air pressure and ambient air temps that greatly affect engine performance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In fact, IL-2 does simulate decreasing air pressure with height and different air temperatures and has done so since day 1. The former is one reason why aircraft performance changes dramatically with height. The latter is why you will overheat more easily on a desert map than a Russian winter one.

Overall, I would say that IL-2 simulates flight behaviour quite effectively, although it is a bit ropey around the stall. It does not simulate navigation, weather or engine managment particularly well (although the latter has got better over time).

Cheers,

RD. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly. He gave us the gamer's excuse. Same thing you hear about people using the wonderwoman view and map icons - "to enjoy the money spent". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Yeah, right.

This series is the best thing going in terms of flight dynamics and physics and aircraft behavior.

No sim is good in the post departure envelope. Older combat sims were made for PCs that could not handle the complexity of the IL2 series. And the world famous M$FS series is table based, which is bunk.

Given that the goal of a simulation is to recreate or "simulate" the behavior of a vehicle or system to the limits of the interface used to interact with it, this series is about as sim (and realistic) as sim can get. The only way to get better is to improve the interface (aka - the PC).

A simulation can also be for something that doesn't actually exist in that it simulate how it would be in it's context. And simulations also predate electronics, going all the way back to WWI.

The only thing anyone could really claim is "missing" from this series is switchology, which, would be nice to have, but isn't vital one way or the other.

On a side note, what's interesting is a friend of mine who doens't fly sims all that often but DOES enjoy LOMAC and CAN take off and land those planes without any problems and also can handle the switchology of that game, can't fly a Ki-27 straight, much less land it. Even the Yak15, which doesn't have the levels of torque, prop wash or p-factor the Ki-27 does, yet still has a low stall speed and good turning capability, was still too difficult for him to land (or even crash survivably). (just to show how irrelevant switchology is to a sim, especially one where the focus is on equipment with minimal switches)

K_Freddie
02-01-2007, 01:22 AM
I think AVGWarhawk was thinking about local weather air pockets/air temps at the same altitude. We know it is modelled for increases in altitude, but would be nice to have localised weather - like flying through a colder valley early in the morning.

Back to the stick story and application of stick pressure. The game does have the effect of stiffening up the controls without the need for trying to emulate this via the Percentage Input values. The Zero controls get really stiff at 390+KPH and the ME109 at around 450KPH.

In reality when you're landing you really have to move the yoke to get the same roll rate than at higher speed where you need less movement to get the same effect. To move the yoke the same distance does require more effort, but it does increase the roll rate that much more than at normal cruise speed - not reduce it. Until such time your wings say goodbye from the roots and you turn into a lawn dart http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

DarkWingDuck...
02-01-2007, 02:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:

Limiting roll prevents stalling on tight turns. . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No it prevents stalling in rapid rolls, not once you are turning, but of course you need to roll first to turn, so I think I understand your point, but the statement is a bit confusing......or is it just me?

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 10:22 AM
Here is another set up that works well over a most USN and P series aircraft:

========
Pitch 69-69-69-69 across the board
Roll 100 across the board
Yaw 100 across the board

Tweek the pitch if feels sluggish or step from 69 up to 83 at max.

WB_Outlaw
02-01-2007, 10:57 AM
<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 does have the effect of stiffening up the controls without the need for trying to emulate this via the Percentage Input values. The Zero controls get really stiff at 390+KPH and the ME109 at around 450KPH. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

None of the posts in this thread are about simulating increased stick forces with speed.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K_Freddie:
In reality when you're landing you really have to move the yoke to get the same roll rate than at higher speed where you need less movement to get the same effect. To move the yoke the same distance does require more effort, but it does increase the roll rate that much more than at normal cruise speed - not reduce it. Until such time your wings say goodbye from the roots and you turn into a lawn dart http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Once again, none of the posts in this thread are disputing the above statement.

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 11:36 AM
Lets get back on topic please. Thus far one has tried the settings and like them. I feel others will like them as well. Please add if constructive post. Every stinking thread in here becomes a dispute or argument over something unrelated to the original posted topic.

MrMojok
02-01-2007, 12:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Zoom2136:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MrMojok:
My x-52 is getting a little bit loosey-goosey and I'm afraid with the 100s I'd be flopping all over the place. I have yet to find a satisfactory object to stick between the handle and spring to firm it up. Maybe I could set some deadzone or something. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I used a ABS 1 1/2" end cap that I cut a slot in so that I can slid it under the handle (between the handle and the spring). The "lip" of the ABS cap was grinded down so that it would allow for full stick mouvement...

Hope this helps </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Is this what you mean?
http://www.hardwarestore.com/media/product/455923_front200.jpg

Is that plastic or rubber?

BlitzPig_DDT
02-01-2007, 12:42 PM
I suppose adjustable Dead Zones and Filtering make no sense to have too, eh? lol

BTW - every new comer to the series and everyone who did a fresh install and greedily jumped in to see the new toys before going through all the hardware settings (or who remembered to back everything up _except_ the conf.ini http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif ) tried the all 100s, and promptly had to tone them way down.

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 12:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
I suppose adjustable Dead Zones and Filtering make no sense to have too, eh? lol

BTW - every new comer to the series and everyone who did a fresh install and greedily jumped in to see the new toys before going through all the hardware settings (or who remembered to back everything up _except_ the conf.ini http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif ) tried the all 100s, and promptly had to tone them way down. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I do not use filtering or dead zone. Do not need it.
BTW-we are not interested in what newcomers have done. We are only interesting in helping them if there is an issue. We are glad you are such an old hand and just brilliant with stick settings. My days with CFS1/2/3 not to mention the Jane's aircraft games must have been such a waste for me. I really believe you are an agitator and nothing more. Promptly stick to topic. Have a nice day http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


PS: I did install my old config file and the stick settings did not work well with 1946.

BlitzPig_DDT
02-01-2007, 01:04 PM
Yes yes of course, anyone who informs you that you are incorrect and totally misunderstanding the point is an "agitator". No news there. lol

The point you either missed or ignored is that the dead zones and filtering are JUST LIKE THE SLIDERS - they are there to help people tune their specific sticks to both the game overall, and specific aircraft they happen to fly. This game's GUI is easier for most people to use than OEM stick software, and not everyone has OEM stick software anyway.

You are insisting everyone using settings other than you are "wrong", and most importantly, claiming that setting a curve somehow doesn't make any sense. That is factually incorrect. THAT is the opposition you are getting here.

CFS and Janes, compared to this series ARE a waste of time and any "skill" gained in those are useless. I go back to the original Lucas Art's BoB and SWOTL. I wouldnl't try to use the time spent in those '89-'92 titles as pertinant to this series.

Just out of curiosity - do you use the twisty stick, or actual pedals?

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 01:13 PM
I do not wish to entertain any questions from you. All posts you have written are agitating in nature and are not on topic. I simply recommended a set up that works for the X52. You felt fit to rip it apart and tell everyone it is a crackpot idea. Again, if you have something constructive to add please do. If not find another thread to agitate someone else.

What is the difference if you have a CH/Cougar? Sorry, but I live in the real world with real kids to feed and keep a roof over their heads. I apologize for not being able to purchase such an expensive stick for a GAME......Take your 'my things are better than your things' kid mentality and go elsewhere. Do I use pedals? What kid of stupid question is that? What if I was missing a foot and could not use pedals. I guess all I could use is a twisty stick. I know, you have pedals and that makes you just the armchair pilot of the year. Good for you http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Again, stick to my topic or move on.

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 01:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MrMojok:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Zoom2136:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MrMojok:
My x-52 is getting a little bit loosey-goosey and I'm afraid with the 100s I'd be flopping all over the place. I have yet to find a satisfactory object to stick between the handle and spring to firm it up. Maybe I could set some deadzone or something. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I used a ABS 1 1/2" end cap that I cut a slot in so that I can slid it under the handle (between the handle and the spring). The "lip" of the ABS cap was grinded down so that it would allow for full stick mouvement...

Hope this helps </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Is this what you mean?
http://www.hardwarestore.com/media/product/455923_front200.jpg

Is that plastic or rubber? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting. My stick is not bad but this is a great idea if she goes south!!!

KaleunFreddie
02-01-2007, 01:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
<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 does have the effect of stiffening up the controls without the need for trying to emulate this via the Percentage Input values. The Zero controls get really stiff at 390+KPH and the ME109 at around 450KPH. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

None of the posts in this thread are about simulating increased stick forces with speed.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K_Freddie:
In reality when you're landing you really have to move the yoke to get the same roll rate than at higher speed where you need less movement to get the same effect. To move the yoke the same distance does require more effort, but it does increase the roll rate that much more than at normal cruise speed - not reduce it. Until such time your wings say goodbye from the roots and you turn into a lawn dart http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Once again, none of the posts in this thread are disputing the above statement.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
-"If you have a stick with a length roughly equal to what was in the -aircraft, you can use 100's more effectively. It's still not dead on -because, as noted, the physical stick signifies pilot strength, not -virtual stick deflection."

-"Just as a side note, the only people I know personally that use all 100s -are more gamers than virtual pilots. They are successful, but they use -ever "trick" they can to maximize their success, not their simming -experience. (and they often have basic sticks too)"
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

FoolTrottel
02-01-2007, 01:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I simply recommended a set up that works for the X52. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nope, you did not... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif No recommendation, and nothing simple about it...

But, you can still make that happen.
Here's some constructive critism:
Change the title, and add 'using X52'

Change some words: Replace 'your' by 'me/I/my' in this part:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Concerning your stick inputs in the game should run like this:

Roll: 100-100-100-100-100 all the way
Pitch: 65-65-65-65-65 all the way This can can tweek down to 58 up to 72
Yaw: 100-100-100-100-100 all the way

Does not seem logical does it? Now, your stick is already calibrated for steps in deflection of your flying surfaces. This is how the stick is manufactured. With this setting you are limiting the deflection of pitch,roll and yaw for your stick. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And, add some specs at the beginning, repeat there you use an X52, and use the the twist handle for rudder...

This will make it a lot easier for ppl who do not happen to own an X52 and do happen to have pedals... they can stop reading quite early. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Have Fun!

BlitzPig_DDT
02-01-2007, 01:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
I do not wish to entertain any questions from you. All posts you have written are agitating in nature and are not on topic. I simply recommended a set up that works for the X52. You felt fit to rip it apart and tell everyone it is a crackpot idea. Again, if you have something constructive to add please do. If not find another thread to agitate someone else.

What is the difference if you have a CH/Cougar? Sorry, but I live in the real world with real kids to feed and keep a roof over their heads. I apologize for not being able to purchase such an expensive stick for a GAME......Take your 'my things are better than your things' kid mentality and go elsewhere. Do I use pedals? What kid of stupid question is that? What if I was missing a foot and could not use pedals. I guess all I could use is a twisty stick. I know, you have pedals and that makes you just the armchair pilot of the year. Good for you http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Again, stick to my topic or move on. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You obviously do not understand what those settings do or why they are there. You continue to display this and attack those who point out you are wrong.

In typical fashion you accuse them of being "agitators" and "kids". After attempting to brag about your flight sim experience and getting shown up, you go the opposite way and claim it's all irrelevant and resort to shouting down anyone who doesn't agree with you, and just like that idiot Micheal Moore, won't even respond to questions from people who don't go along with you - clearly being afraid of what answering them might do. lol

Sorry, but just on that alone, nevermind that you just chose to single me out and ignore the other people who are likewise explaining that you are incorrect, means that I will not "move on", but rather, move in. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

You're a gamer, not a simmer. You don't understand the difference between sticks or the benefit of a set of pedals over a twisty stick (or even the detriment a twist stick presents), OR even the differences resulting from spring tension.

It's no surprise that you don't understand the sliders.

Don't you think you've made your point? This is three pages with loads of views. The game defaults to all 100s. You've been shown 6 ways from sunday just how and why you are wrong and people who want to try it can. Oleg himself even recommended a stick curve which actually starts at 0 (and there is the instance of a WWII pilot who flew the game and thought it was bunk until someone got him to play with the sliders and he got the planes to feel right - and it was FAR from 100s anywhere). lol

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 01:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FoolTrottel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I simply recommended a set up that works for the X52. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nope, you did not... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif No recommendation, and nothing simple about it...

But, you can still make that happen.
Here's some constructive critism:
Change the title, and add 'using X52'

Change some words: Replace 'your' by 'me/I/my' in this part:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Concerning your stick inputs in the game should run like this:

Roll: 100-100-100-100-100 all the way
Pitch: 65-65-65-65-65 all the way This can can tweek down to 58 up to 72
Yaw: 100-100-100-100-100 all the way

Does not seem logical does it? Now, your stick is already calibrated for steps in deflection of your flying surfaces. This is how the stick is manufactured. With this setting you are limiting the deflection of pitch,roll and yaw for your stick. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And, add some specs at the beginning, repeat there you use an X52, and use the the twist handle for rudder...

This will make it a lot easier for ppl who do not happen to own an X52 and do happen to have pedals... they can stop reading quite early. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Have Fun! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Sorry mate, works on several squad members set ups and different sticks including pedals. Besides, if a someone who was really interested in the set up would probably ask about pedals. In fact it they were interest question would be posed. Therefore I would answer. But most prefer just disapprove and put down what seemingly works. Fortunate for me, one other has tried this and states it works. I thrown it out there for all who might be having stick issues. Just another avenue to try.

BlitzPig_DDT
02-01-2007, 02:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Besides, if a someone who was really interested in the set up would probably ask about pedals. Therefore I would answer. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No you wouldn't, and didn't. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

FT is dead on, suggestions require much different wording, and also information to be offered up front, right away, not expecting people to work for it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted in the PF manual:
RECOMMENDATIONS
For those who experience difficulties controlling aircraft with the default joystick profile (axis sensitivity curves in the Input menu), we provide sensitivity curves that we found more suitable for most of the modern input devices.

To set up the curves, go to the Input menu under the Hardware Setup in the Main Menu, and
adjust the values according the following chart:

Pitch:
0 5 10 17 25 33 43 54 71 100
Roll:
0 3 7 15 25 35 50 66 84 100
Yaw:
0 8 19 29 39 51 62 75 86 100 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 02:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Besides, if a someone who was really interested in the set up would probably ask about pedals. Therefore I would answer. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No you wouldn't, and didn't. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

FT is dead on, suggestions require much different wording, and also information to be offered up front, right away, not expecting people to work for it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted in the PF manual:
RECOMMENDATIONS
For those who experience difficulties controlling aircraft with the default joystick profile (axis sensitivity curves in the Input menu), we provide sensitivity curves that we found more suitable for most of the modern input devices.

To set up the curves, go to the Input menu under the Hardware Setup in the Main Menu, and
adjust the values according the following chart:

Pitch:
0 5 10 17 25 33 43 54 71 100
Roll:
0 3 7 15 25 35 50 66 84 100
Yaw:
0 8 19 29 39 51 62 75 86 100 </div></BLOCKQUOTE> </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Recommendation, not written in stone. Also, what stick? Seems open to speculation. What about pedals? It does not specify. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif These recommendation do not work for me. Again, you keep insisting that I'm wrong. Wrong about what? That your set up and theory is correct? I'm sure it is but the settings I'm using in 1946 are RIGHT for me and might be for others. Please get back on topic as you seem to be the forum etiquette police. I appreciate FT's advise and now your two cents on it.

BlitzPig_DDT
02-01-2007, 02:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Recommendation, not written in stone. Also, what stick? Seems open to speculation. What about pedals? It does not specify. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif These recommendation do not work for me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unlike you initial post then....? I had no idea that Oleg has officially recognized you as the standing authority on his applications, or on PC input utilization. Wow.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Eric Brown:
I found in general the default joystick settings tended to be oversensitive. With my recommended settings it will give people a real feeling of how they actually flew. The flight models in Il-2:FB are done very well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

^^ -&gt; http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/309109534/p/1

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Captain Brown's Settings

Want to get the most realistic IL-2:FB experience possible? After testing, Captain Brown managed to help define what he considers the most realistic joystick sensitivity settings. If you have a copy of IL-2:FB and would like to emulate this go into Hardware setup, then 'Input' then 'Controls' - when you will find a range of sliders. Adjust these to:

Pitch 0, 1, 3, 7, 9, 14, 18, 23, 27, 33
Roll 0, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 12, 17
Yaw 0, 0, 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 11, 14, 16

Bringing these down to the values listed in the different axes should make for a much more realistic and true-to-life experience - in what is already a highly realistic warbird sim. Experienced Il-2 flyers may find that these seem to make the aircraft feel more sluggish and less responsive, but these settings will make take-off and landings easier, as well as manoeuvres requiring small corrections like lining up behind an enemy aircraft or precision dive bombing. It also has to be remembered that vintage warbirds are considerably less agile than modern jet fighters - so that a 'slow roll' seen performed at airshows is very often a WW2 aircraft's max rate of roll - rather than the twinkling roll rate an F-16 might have. These settings bring the handling of aircraft in IL-2:FB more in line with Captain Brown's experience of the real thing and, of course, users can tweak these settings to their heart's content, perhaps adding more sensitivity at 100% deflection so that in extreme dogfights there is still full control authority there at the end of the scale. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

but these settings will make take-off and landings easier, as well as manoeuvres requiring small corrections like lining up behind an enemy aircraft or precision dive bombing

Interesting.

Interesting how both the man who made the game, and the man who flew the planes for real (using an X45, btw, although with pedals, naturally), seem to think 100% opposite of you.

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 02:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Recommendation, not written in stone. Also, what stick? Seems open to speculation. What about pedals? It does not specify. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif These recommendation do not work for me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unlike you initial post then....? I had no idea that Oleg has officially recognized you as the standing authority on his applications, or on PC input utilization. Wow.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Eric Brown:
I found in general the default joystick settings tended to be oversensitive. With my recommended settings it will give people a real feeling of how they actually flew. The flight models in Il-2:FB are done very well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

^^ -&gt; http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/309109534/p/1

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Captain Brown's Settings

Want to get the most realistic IL-2:FB experience possible? After testing, Captain Brown managed to help define what he considers the most realistic joystick sensitivity settings. If you have a copy of IL-2:FB and would like to emulate this go into Hardware setup, then 'Input' then 'Controls' - when you will find a range of sliders. Adjust these to:

Pitch 0, 1, 3, 7, 9, 14, 18, 23, 27, 33
Roll 0, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 12, 17
Yaw 0, 0, 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 11, 14, 16

Bringing these down to the values listed in the different axes should make for a much more realistic and true-to-life experience - in what is already a highly realistic warbird sim. Experienced Il-2 flyers may find that these seem to make the aircraft feel more sluggish and less responsive, but these settings will make take-off and landings easier, as well as manoeuvres requiring small corrections like lining up behind an enemy aircraft or precision dive bombing. It also has to be remembered that vintage warbirds are considerably less agile than modern jet fighters - so that a 'slow roll' seen performed at airshows is very often a WW2 aircraft's max rate of roll - rather than the twinkling roll rate an F-16 might have. These settings bring the handling of aircraft in IL-2:FB more in line with Captain Brown's experience of the real thing and, of course, users can tweak these settings to their heart's content, perhaps adding more sensitivity at 100% deflection so that in extreme dogfights there is still full control authority there at the end of the scale. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

but these settings will make take-off and landings easier, as well as manoeuvres requiring small corrections like lining up behind an enemy aircraft or precision dive bombing

Interesting.

Interesting how both the man who made the game, and the man who flew the planes for real (using an X45, btw, although with pedals, naturally), seem to think 100% opposite of you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Original post states I use the X52. I never stated that I was the oficionado for stick in the game. I stated these settings worked for me and I use an X52. I did not realize you were the defender of the faith for Oleg and UBI. I'm glad those settings work for Capt Brown, these will not work for me.
Why can't you just realize what works for them does not work for others. Again, these are recommendation, not set in stone. Perhaps it is hard for you to realize these gentlemen believe opposite to me but what I have going works is OK because it works.

Here, if it makes you feel better, You win! OK. Everything you have stated is correct to the letter. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif We good now?

FoolTrottel
02-01-2007, 02:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">(...) but the settings I'm using in 1946 are RIGHT for me and might be for others. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well then, why not edit your initial post accordingly, like I suggested... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Oh, and please add something like a divider into your signature... preferably above the text...

Regarding you using of pedals or not, no one's asked, yet you already told us:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">(...)I have watched outside views and although my rudder is maxed at 100% it still moves as my hand twists the stick little by little until my stick has reached my turning radius and the 100% I dialed in.(...) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have Fun!

CarpeNoctem43
02-01-2007, 02:34 PM
I think the disputes come from having a misunderstanding of what is going on and thus how the settings will affect the outcome.

At least from my POV.

So to further the discussion along the lines of the OP...

I did try the latest settings offline - and I got results I totally did not expect. I expected to be all over the place and not be able to effectively fly the plane. These expectations were based on my trying similar settings (100s across the board) before and everything total whacked out.

The difference between then and now - Joystick.

Before I had a cheap $20 Saitek from Walmart. Now I have a Saitek HOTAS w/Rudders. Its fairly new so I am still adjusting to it.

But one thing I noticed, in the Game Controller - Control Panel Aplet was that the new joystick has more of a "value" range. Meaning the values (steps) displayed when calibrating and viewing Raw data was immensely different.

I don't know the exact values but its a factor of 2-5 the amount of values as the cheapo.

I think this point is paramount to this discussion. If a system that has a resolution of 10 is replaced by a system of resolution 50. Things are now 5 times as smooth and 5 times as accurate.

Now, the old system would jump around with the slightest movement of the stick or twisty. Now it doesn't and totally because of resolution.

For example a joystick with a resolution of 10 jumps in steps as it goes through the range. So from 0-9% of travel the joystick reports X, from 10-19% it reports Y, and so on.

If you double that resolution now from 0-4% it will report M, 5-9% = N, 10-14%= O.

It is my belief now, that the lower the resolution of the joystick the more you should look into generating conversion curves. The more resolution you have - the less of a need to curve the settings.

Think about it. If you curve it that means that in dogfights, TnB especially; because of curves you are forced to use the mid-high to high ranges of the joystick in a tight turn, or fast roll because the lower ranges are not performing to their peaks.

Also, using curves you will have a jump between ranges. I.e. if you say 10% of of inputs are to be used in the 10% of stick movements and the 20% in the 20% of stick movements that changed drastically between the bounds. The slope of the line is now doubled. Then tripled for 30% all the way up to 100%. (when compared to the 10%)

I think this boils down to percentage of resolution. Higher resolution means you can use higher percentages. lower resolution means you should use lower percentages.

Isn't that why Oleg had this included? To deal with all qualities of "joysticks"?

Now I could be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. But I think these 100% settings have merit. I think 69% pitch should be higher - but an online game is in order to find out.

-Rick

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 02:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FoolTrottel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">(...) but the settings I'm using in 1946 are RIGHT for me and might be for others. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well then, why not edit your initial post accordingly, like I suggested... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Oh, and please add something like a divider into your signature... preferably above the text...

Regarding you using of pedals or not, no one's asked, yet you already told us:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">(...)I have watched outside views and although my rudder is maxed at 100% it still moves as my hand twists the stick little by little until my stick has reached my turning radius and the 100% I dialed in.(...) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have Fun! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you for reading again. I will change per your request. For those there were interested they would read on. Normally if the first post is of no interest, off you go to the next http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 02:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CarpeNoctem43:
I think the disputes come from having a misunderstanding of what is going on and thus how the settings will affect the outcome.

At least from my POV.

So to further the discussion along the lines of the OP...

I did try the latest settings offline - and I got results I totally did not expect. I expected to be all over the place and not be able to effectively fly the plane. These expectations were based on my trying similar settings (100s across the board) before and everything total whacked out.

The difference between then and now - Joystick.

Before I had a cheap $20 Saitek from Walmart. Now I have a Saitek HOTAS w/Rudders. Its fairly new so I am still adjusting to it.

But one thing I noticed, in the Game Controller - Control Panel Aplet was that the new joystick has more of a "value" range. Meaning the values (steps) displayed when calibrating and viewing Raw data was immensely different.

I don't know the exact values but its a factor of 2-5 the amount of values as the cheapo.

I think this point is paramount to this discussion. If a system that has a resolution of 10 is replaced by a system of resolution 50. Things are now 5 times as smooth and 5 times as accurate.

Now, the old system would jump around with the slightest movement of the stick or twisty. Now it doesn't and totally because of resolution.

For example a joystick with a resolution of 10 jumps in steps as it goes through the range. So from 0-9% of travel the joystick reports X, from 10-19% it reports Y, and so on.

If you double that resolution now from 0-4% it will report M, 5-9% = N, 10-14%= O.

It is my belief now, that the lower the resolution of the joystick the more you should look into generating conversion curves. The more resolution you have - the less of a need to curve the settings.

Think about it. If you curve it that means that in dogfights, TnB especially; because of curves you are forced to use the mid-high to high ranges of the joystick in a tight turn, or fast roll because the lower ranges are not performing to their peaks.

Also, using curves you will have a jump between ranges. I.e. if you say 10% of of inputs are to be used in the 10% of stick movements and the 20% in the 20% of stick movements that changed drastically between the bounds. The slope of the line is now doubled. Then tripled for 30% all the way up to 100%. (when compared to the 10%)

I think this boils down to percentage of resolution. Higher resolution means you can use higher percentages. lower resolution means you should use lower percentages.

Isn't that why Oleg had this included? To deal with all qualities of "joysticks"?

Now I could be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. But I think these 100% settings have merit. I think 69% pitch should be higher - but an online game is in order to find out.

-Rick </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks Rick, the pitch is the only one for you to tweek to your tastes. 69 is a good starting point. Even attempt a step here starting at 69 up to 83 as max for pitch. And yes, deal with quality of ALL sticks hense the in game input screen.

BlitzPig_DDT
02-01-2007, 03:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CarpeNoctem43:
It is my belief now, that the lower the resolution of the joystick the more you should look into generating conversion curves. The more resolution you have - the less of a need to curve the settings.

Think about it. If you curve it that means that in dogfights, TnB especially; because of curves you are forced to use the mid-high to high ranges of the joystick in a tight turn, or fast roll because the lower ranges are not performing to their peaks.

Also, using curves you will have a jump between ranges. I.e. if you say 10% of of inputs are to be used in the 10% of stick movements and the 20% in the 20% of stick movements that changed drastically between the bounds. The slope of the line is now doubled. Then tripled for 30% all the way up to 100%. (when compared to the 10%)

I think this boils down to percentage of resolution. Higher resolution means you can use higher percentages. lower resolution means you should use lower percentages.

Isn't that why Oleg had this included? To deal with all qualities of "joysticks"?

Now I could be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. But I think these 100% settings have merit. I think 69% pitch should be higher - but an online game is in order to find out.

-Rick </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not entirely correct Rick.

Yes, the higher the resolution the smoother the input response will be, but that is not something the 10 band sliders alone deal with Filtering and deadband come into play as well.

And to a large extent, a crappy j/s is a crappy j/s, there's only so much you can do with software to account for that.

You are incorrect about the jumps though. Set up a scale and watch the green and red blocks in the square to the left. One represents physical stick postion relative to total possible travel, and the other represents what the game is reading. With a properly set up curve, there will be lag in the biggining with both reading max at the extreme - but no jerkiness or jumps, just a smooth curve.

Jerkiness in a stick is generally the result of spiking potentiometers, a fairly common problem, most prevalent in old sticks or those with cheap pots. If you get something like Hall Effect Sensors (which have no internal contact points), you will pretty much never have a stick spike - unless the gimbals acquire some 'stiction'.

Also, the higher levels of input would be needed, not for higher res sticks, but rather *longer* sticks.

I plan (to hopefully someday) fab an extension for my Cougar's handle. (the real trick holding this back is where to place everything once I do this) This will more closely approximate the length of a "typical" WWII fighter's control column. Then I can slide the scales up because I will have more finite control over everything.

The purpose of the sliders, and the reason for toning down the first few bands and making a curve, is to deal with the fact that we have very short sticks compared to the real thing. This is why the PF manual says what it does, and why Capt. Brown thought the aircraft were twitchy, over sensitive and over responsive, and why Oleg also uses a response curve, rather than full 100s.

FoolTrottel
02-01-2007, 03:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">These work great! In fact, I'm willing to beat any stick will work great with these. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You're a lucky guy for that typo, or you'd have lost a bet. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Them settings do not work great for my stick (Guillemot FFB) as in making it all waaay too twitchy.
I might keep up the 100's for the pedals (homebuilt http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif), but for the others: Back to the curves!

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 05:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CarpeNoctem43:
It is my belief now, that the lower the resolution of the joystick the more you should look into generating conversion curves. The more resolution you have - the less of a need to curve the settings.

Think about it. If you curve it that means that in dogfights, TnB especially; because of curves you are forced to use the mid-high to high ranges of the joystick in a tight turn, or fast roll because the lower ranges are not performing to their peaks.

Also, using curves you will have a jump between ranges. I.e. if you say 10% of of inputs are to be used in the 10% of stick movements and the 20% in the 20% of stick movements that changed drastically between the bounds. The slope of the line is now doubled. Then tripled for 30% all the way up to 100%. (when compared to the 10%)

I think this boils down to percentage of resolution. Higher resolution means you can use higher percentages. lower resolution means you should use lower percentages.

Isn't that why Oleg had this included? To deal with all qualities of "joysticks"?

Now I could be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. But I think these 100% settings have merit. I think 69% pitch should be higher - but an online game is in order to find out.

-Rick </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not entirely correct Rick.

Yes, the higher the resolution the smoother the input response will be, but that is not something the 10 band sliders alone deal with Filtering and deadband come into play as well.

And to a large extent, a crappy j/s is a crappy j/s, there's only so much you can do with software to account for that.

You are incorrect about the jumps though. Set up a scale and watch the green and red blocks in the square to the left. One represents physical stick postion relative to total possible travel, and the other represents what the game is reading. With a properly set up curve, there will be lag in the biggining with both reading max at the extreme - but no jerkiness or jumps, just a smooth curve.

Jerkiness in a stick is generally the result of spiking potentiometers, a fairly common problem, most prevalent in old sticks or those with cheap pots. If you get something like Hall Effect Sensors (which have no internal contact points), you will pretty much never have a stick spike - unless the gimbals acquire some 'stiction'.

Also, the higher levels of input would be needed, not for higher res sticks, but rather *longer* sticks.

I plan (to hopefully someday) fab an extension for my Cougar's handle. (the real trick holding this back is where to place everything once I do this) This will more closely approximate the length of a "typical" WWII fighter's control column. Then I can slide the scales up because I will have more finite control over everything.

The purpose of the sliders, and the reason for toning down the first few bands and making a curve, is to deal with the fact that we have very short sticks compared to the real thing. This is why the PF manual says what it does, and why Capt. Brown thought the aircraft were twitchy, over sensitive and over responsive, and why Oleg also uses a response curve, rather than full 100s. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The fact still remains, without the talk of pots, throw radius, etc., the X52(X45 my squad mate uses) respond very well with these settings. We can talk all the technical terms we would like but to no end will this talk change this setting for the X52. It works. As Rick stated, "not totally without merit" because he has tried this and with good outcome. Maybe a tweek on the pitch. This begs the question, you posted the team who tested the game used an X45. You found this interesting. Why then do you use a cougar? Is it that the Saitec is just a "gamers" stick? If so, then we can deduce that the "testers" are just gamers like me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

rnzoli
02-01-2007, 05:48 PM
I didn't and couldn't follow all details here, but here is another point of view: I always heard X52 is quite different than other sticks, you have to put the sliders up to 100% to get a similar response to your phisical stick inputs in the game as with another stick, eg., MS Sidewinder, or a Logitech.

I haven't really understood why, until I started to convert the potentiometers on my home-built pedal to optical sensors. To my surprise, I got the same effect - I had to up the sliders to all 100 percent on the pedals/yaw axis.

The reason is simple: the physical layout of the angle detector is providing a non-linear input already. It is less responsive near the center than near the full deflected positions.

Moral of the story: the angle detectors in some sticks can be non-linear types (Hall, optical), causing a curved "stick position to digical signal" translation already inside the stick. If you used a curved response profile in IL-2 as well, it would be double-smoothed and as such, quite unresponsive.

The curved response profile in IL-2 hardware setup is intended for sticks with linear pots only.

BlitzPig_DDT
02-01-2007, 06:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rnzoli:
I didn't and couldn't follow all details here, but here is another point of view: I always heard X52 is quite different than other sticks, you have to put the sliders up to 100% to get a similar response to your phisical stick inputs in the game as with another stick, eg., MS Sidewinder, or a Logitech.

I haven't really understood why, until I started to convert the potentiometers on my home-built pedal to optical sensors. To my surprise, I got the same effect - I had to up the sliders to all 100 percent on the pedals/yaw axis.

The reason is simple: the physical layout of the angle detector is providing a non-linear input already. It is less responsive near the center than near the full deflected positions.

Moral of the story: the angle detectors in some sticks can be non-linear types (Hall, optical), causing a curved "stick position to digical signal" translation already inside the stick. If you used a curved response profile in IL-2 as well, it would be double-smoothed and as such, quite unresponsive.

The curved response profile in IL-2 hardware setup is intended for sticks with linear pots only. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Hall Sensors in my Cougar are linear in output according to both the IL2 Gui and the Cougar's test app (I use it every day to manually calibrate).

In fact, rheostats (potentiometers) are more likely to be non-linear since they are contact electrical resistance based.

But, as you said, there may be something different about the X-52. Trouble is, he's saying it's "better", period, for all sticks, and that a curve 'makes no sense', for anybody, and telling the rest of us we're wrong and "agitators" and the whole 9 because we happen to understand why the games creator recommends a curve. lol

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 06:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rnzoli:
I didn't and couldn't follow all details here, but here is another point of view: I always heard X52 is quite different than other sticks, you have to put the sliders up to 100% to get a similar response to your phisical stick inputs in the game as with another stick, eg., MS Sidewinder, or a Logitech.

I haven't really understood why, until I started to convert the potentiometers on my home-built pedal to optical sensors. To my surprise, I got the same effect - I had to up the sliders to all 100 percent on the pedals/yaw axis.

The reason is simple: the physical layout of the angle detector is providing a non-linear input already. It is less responsive near the center than near the full deflected positions.

Moral of the story: the angle detectors in some sticks can be non-linear types (Hall, optical), causing a curved "stick position to digical signal" translation already inside the stick. If you used a curved response profile in IL-2 as well, it would be double-smoothed and as such, quite unresponsive.

The curved response profile in IL-2 hardware setup is intended for sticks with linear pots only. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Hall Sensors in my Cougar are linear in output according to both the IL2 Gui and the Cougar's test app (I use it every day to manually calibrate).

In fact, rheostats (potentiometers) are more likely to be non-linear since they are contact electrical resistance based.

But, as you said, there may be something different about the X-52. Trouble is, he's saying it's "better", period, for all sticks, and that a curve 'makes no sense', for anybody, and telling the rest of us we're wrong and "agitators" and the whole 9 because we happen to understand why the games creator recommends a curve. lol </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. Nowhere did I say it was better for all sticks.
2. The curve makes no sense with the x52 to me.
3. I never said anyone was wrong. Thats where you came in for that notion.
4. Yes, the game creator RECOMMENDED, did not etch in stone.
5. I called you and only you an agitator because that is how I see your responses. I never said 'you all are wrong and are agitators'. If you find any of this to the contrary, please direct me too it and I will stand corrected.

As I see it, the 100 setting is not with out foundation. It works for some sticks.

By the way, I went to the PC game store and asked the clerk for a game. He said the IL2 is a lovely game. So I bought the game. Now this "gamer" is really enjoying this game with these settings http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

BlitzPig_DDT
02-01-2007, 06:38 PM
Several people, including Outlaw and FoolTrottle have explicitly shown where you did what you just not claimed to have not done.

Anything can be a game - all it takes is for us to do it for entertainment purposes (ie - our personal or professional lives not hanging on our peformance or skills acuired). Like a gamer who wishes to only game the game, you seem to insist that the fact that it is sold as a "game" means that any accuracy or realism is null, void and moot, and you are completely wrong. Seems to be a pattern actually.

As mentioned before, you've made your point (what little there was), unless *you* simply wish to "agitate" (as indicated by your tone), why continue to keep this thread going and taking shots? Hmm? lol

Spinnetti
02-01-2007, 06:57 PM
With all the changes in every patch, I found I always just fly the defaults (almost exclusively fly the FW190A-5 or A-6).. easier to modify my skills to the program than constantly messing with stick settings. In fact, I never even installed any drivers for my stick, and just went with the settings that came up when I plugged it in.

bchivers3377
02-01-2007, 07:03 PM
These settings work better for my x52.

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 07:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Spinnetti:
With all the changes in every patch, I found I always just fly the defaults (almost exclusively fly the FW190A-5 or A-6).. easier to modify my skills to the program than constantly messing with stick settings. In fact, I never even installed any drivers for my stick, and just went with the settings that came up when I plugged it in. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

With my X52 the defaults just did not work for me. So I went with these. The just seems to work well. But again, it might work better or worse for you. Give it a try. If it is worse then set them back. Trial and test. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 07:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bchivers3377:
These settings work better for my x52. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great! I'm enjoying what I have.

AVGWarhawk
02-01-2007, 07:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
Several people, including Outlaw and FoolTrottle have explicitly shown where you did what you just not claimed to have not done.

Anything can be a game - all it takes is for us to do it for entertainment purposes (ie - our personal or professional lives not hanging on our peformance or skills acuired). Like a gamer who wishes to only game the game, you seem to insist that the fact that it is sold as a "game" means that any accuracy or realism is null, void and moot, and you are completely wrong. Seems to be a pattern actually.

As mentioned before, you've made your point (what little there was), unless *you* simply wish to "agitate" (as indicated by your tone), why continue to keep this thread going and taking shots? Hmm? lol </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Qoute FT:

Posted Thu February 01 2007 13:31 Hide Post
quote:
(...) but the settings I'm using in 1946 are RIGHT for me and might be for others.

Well then, why not edit your initial post accordingly, like I suggested...

Oh, and please add something like a divider into your signature... preferably above the text...

Regarding you using of pedals or not, no one's asked, yet you already told us:

quote:
(...)I have watched outside views and although my rudder is maxed at 100% it still moves as my hand twists the stick little by little until my stick has reached my turning radius and the 100% I dialed in.(...)


FT has been nothing but a perfect gentleman. His post above covers the pedal issue. My original post covers the X52 stick issue. I can not find where I emphatically said everyone is an agitator and wrong.

Now if you look at another post, an X52 user said these work for him.

Posted Thu February 01 2007 18:03 Hide Post
These settings work better for my x52.
Posts: 40 | Registered

So I keeping up with this thread for those that are interested in stick settings. Not to take shots at you. You just keep on firing back at me.

BlitzPig_DDT
02-01-2007, 08:14 PM
You're 95% of the people interested, and that was the first post where you DIDN'T take a shot, but STILL made a slightly smart assed comment.

That really is the only reason I'm still here. lol (as by now I think everyone can see what the reason behind what you had denounced)

msalama
02-01-2007, 11:41 PM
FWIW people w/ a MS Sidewinder Precision 2 might like to try these settings out:

1 11 21 32 42 52 63 75 87 100 (all axii)

Deadzone - as small as possible
Filtering - as little as possible

These give you both precise steering and full control authority when needed I've found http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

FoolTrottel
02-02-2007, 12:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">FT has been nothing but a perfect gentleman. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well now, thank you for that.

But, you haven't changed a bit regarding the tone of your initial post. Though you said you would:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Thank you for reading again. I will change per your request. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're calling me a gentleman, but you now act like a Fool, and make me look like one http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

(Oh, and once you do get to edit that initial post, don't forget that one in PF!)

rnzoli
02-02-2007, 01:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:

The Hall Sensors in my Cougar are linear </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, because AFAIK the Cougar-mod sensors are active ones, i.e., there is a small elecrical circuitry taking care of compensating for temperature etc. No wonder they cost so much http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AVGWarhawk
02-02-2007, 05:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FoolTrottel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">FT has been nothing but a perfect gentleman. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well now, thank you for that.

But, you haven't changed a bit regarding the tone of your initial post. Though you said you would:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Thank you for reading again. I will change per your request. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're calling me a gentleman, but you now act like a Fool, and make me look like one http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

(Oh, and once you do get to edit that initial post, don't forget that one in PF!) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your disclaimer has been posted as requested. Sorry for the delay. Life happens.

AVGWarhawk
02-02-2007, 05:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
You're 95% of the people interested, and that was the first post where you DIDN'T take a shot, but STILL made a slightly smart assed comment.

That really is the only reason I'm still here. lol (as by now I think everyone can see what the reason behind what you had denounced) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now I remember why I do not frequent this forum. BTW keep the nasty words from the 'smart' part of my anotomy and your posts. Young kids do read these. The real reason you are here is so you can get the last word in and pat yourself on the back for a job well done. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

LT.INSTG8R
02-02-2007, 06:37 AM
Well I cant disagree with him regarding these setting on an X-52 anyway. I used to use the "oleg" settings or close too for almost 2 yrs now(okay I had a whole rethink during "The Wobbles" phase but then just resorted to default settings, but I found they were far too sloppy and recently switched to a 50-100 line that gave me a heck of alot better response so I will most definitely try the full 100s but Im sure I will still want a bit of a curve in the rudder still( I can clearly see the stick responds better to the 100s in JoyControl but the rudder still looked too snappy so I will try my 50-100 with it.
Will let you know

AVGWarhawk
02-02-2007, 07:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LT.INSTG8R:
Well I cant disagree with him regarding these setting on an X-52 anyway. I used to use the "oleg" settings or close too for almost 2 yrs now(okay I had a whole rethink during "The Wobbles" phase but then just resorted to default settings, but I found they were far too sloppy and recently switched to a 50-100 line that gave me a heck of alot better response so I will most definitely try the full 100s but Im sure I will still want a bit of a curve in the rudder still( I can clearly see the stick responds better to the 100s in JoyControl but the rudder still looked too snappy so I will try my 50-100 with it.
Will let you know </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If it is the X52 this is a great base line. Some just move the pitch up or down for more or less response. For some reason the Tempest with 58 for pitch across the board is a great flyer. What I did was step my pitch from 69 to max out at 83. Seems to work well with most USN planes and P51/40. Again, tweek to taste.

FoolTrottel
02-02-2007, 09:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Sorry for the delay. Life happens. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
np, ty, http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

AVGWarhawk
02-02-2007, 11:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FoolTrottel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Sorry for the delay. Life happens. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
np, ty, http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

WB_Outlaw
02-02-2007, 03:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
If it is the X52 this is a great base line. Some just move the pitch up or down for more or less response. For some reason the Tempest with 58 for pitch across the board is a great flyer. What I did was step my pitch from 69 to max out at 83. Seems to work well with most USN planes and P51/40. Again, tweek to taste. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Any setting on any axis that prevents the full 50lbs of stick force available from being used is a mistake IMO. It's not like you have to set the full range of physical travel high but leaving the final slider at anything less than 100 will limit your abilities at the extreme end that you may need sometime. In the case above you're missing out on 17% or 8.5lbs of stick force. In a high speed dive that could easily mean the difference between pulling out or becoming a soking hole in the terrain file.

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-02-2007, 04:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
If it is the X52 this is a great base line. Some just move the pitch up or down for more or less response. For some reason the Tempest with 58 for pitch across the board is a great flyer. What I did was step my pitch from 69 to max out at 83. Seems to work well with most USN planes and P51/40. Again, tweek to taste. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Any setting on any axis that prevents the full 50lbs of stick force available from being used is a mistake IMO. It's not like you have to set the full range of physical travel high but leaving the final slider at anything less than 100 will limit your abilities at the extreme end that you may need sometime. In the case above you're missing out on 17% or 8.5lbs of stick force. In a high speed dive that could easily mean the difference between pulling out or becoming a soking hole in the terrain file.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heres the thing though, that exta 17% if used will make my plane fall out of the sky. I limit the pitch to the point of stalling. Currently I have the pitch set to 83 max for the F4F, I can not turn like a zero and should not be able to in all reality, but I can eventually get the sight on him as the zero can not keep up the turn indefinitly. If I run the max 100 on pitch , the nose comes up too far and I end up with wing stall. In a high speed dive and yank the stick back to 100%(if allowed in the slider on the IL2 screen) it produces a stall as angle of attack gets screwy. All I can say is using these settings on the X52 produces a smooth flying aircraft. I'm able to keep a steady bead and can turn w/o wing stall or flat out spin. We have been playing the campaign mode that came with the game. If is quite enjoyable fighting the Zero. Sure they out turn me and fly on rails but I'm quite successful with the F4F. These settings work well with the Corsair against the Ki. Hellcat, P51 and P40 much the same. So, yes, I loose the 17% but I do not need that 17% as it only makes flight uncontrollable once I pass the threshold of 83 as set in the slider interface. Anyway, the F4F in team tactics is the only way to use them and we do. Same with the majority of aircraft my squad uses. Whatever the case, limiting the pitch on the X52 works for me and others in my squad who use it and the X45. Just posting our findings for others with stick issues and the X52

WB_Outlaw
02-02-2007, 05:19 PM
If a player can't stay out of the last 10% of physical travel then more practice would be better advice to give than limiting the stick force. Also, your definition of a "high speed dive" is way too slow if you can stall simply by throwing in the full 50lbs on the pull-out.

As I have said before, to each his own but your solution is a poor one that could be easily accomplished with practice without limiting the capability of the aircraft.


--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-02-2007, 07:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
If a player can't stay out of the last 10% of physical travel then more practice would be better advice to give than limiting the stick force. Also, your definition of a "high speed dive" is way too slow if you can stall simply by throwing in the full 50lbs on the pull-out.

As I have said before, to each his own but your solution is a poor one that could be easily accomplished with practice without limiting the capability of the aircraft.


--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How is it a poor solution? I should just adjust my stick settings in incremented steps and each slider finals at 100% and become a light handed stick user? Sounds counter productive for enjoying the game. What type of stick do you use? Is it something other than the Saitek manufactured stick? If so are we comparing apples to oranges when it comes to differently manufactured sticks. I'm not sure. If we are given the sliders for individual stick response why would limiting my pitch be a poor solution? Why have sliders at all? Perhaps there should just be a default setting and everyone needs to practice. As far as limiting the capability of the aircraft, I don't understand. If I pull the stick back allow 100% deflection and the plane stalls, have we not gone beyond the capability of the aircraft? I would imagine so. Why are there wing slats on certain aircraft that deploy on turning manuevers? Because the capability of stable flight is lost without the leading edge of the wing deploying a slat. I don't think "more practice" is a thorough answer to a poor solution. Also, it is agreed that different planes need different stick settings...yes? I think Blitzpig would agree here and we do not agree on much. Why have different settings? Can we just practice more with default settings so we do not limit the capability of the aircraft? Sorry, but I do not think I'm limiting the capability of the aircraft, I'm preventing it from acomplishing things it is not capable of doing. I see the other side of the coin.

WB_Outlaw
02-02-2007, 08:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
What type of stick do you use? Is it something other than the Saitek manufactured stick? If so are we comparing apples to oranges when it comes to differently manufactured sticks. I'm not sure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I drive an X-52 with Saitek pedals and no, it's not comparing apples to oranges when you're talking about getting the full 50lbs of force. ALL sticks are capable of doing that and it is controlled with the last 10% of physical deflection. Now that last 10% will differ with differing physical stick throw but it's not that much between sticks. The main remaining difference is A/D resolution which affects the force increment in the game (it's inversely proportional) BUT, I'm ONLY talking about the last 10% of physical throw which you shouldn't be using much anyway, the differences will be minor. As I said before, if you can't stay out of the last 10% of physical deflection, you need to practice.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
If I pull the stick back allow 100% deflection and the plane stalls, have we not gone beyond the capability of the aircraft? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, you have exceeded the capability of the aircraft but that will NOT happen in all cases, yet your solution will ALWAYS limit your stick force even in cases where it will NOT exceed the capability of the aircraft.

Again, if you will actually read my post you will see that I only mention setting the LAST slider to 100%, not all of them. You can set the others to however light you want and STILL be able to get the full 50lbs of stick force when you need it.

To sum it up once more, if you can't stay out of the last 10% of physical deflection, YOU NEED MORE PRACTICE. You solution is equivalent to removing part of the elevator because you have trouble over controlling in pitch.

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-02-2007, 09:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
What type of stick do you use? Is it something other than the Saitek manufactured stick? If so are we comparing apples to oranges when it comes to differently manufactured sticks. I'm not sure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I drive an X-52 with Saitek pedals and no, it's not comparing apples to oranges when you're talking about getting the full 50lbs of force. ALL sticks are capable of doing that and it is controlled with the last 10% of physical deflection. Now that last 10% will differ with differing physical stick throw but it's not that much between sticks. The main remaining difference is A/D resolution which affects the force increment in the game (it's inversely proportional) BUT, I'm ONLY talking about the last 10% of physical throw which you shouldn't be using much anyway, the differences will be minor. As I said before, if you can't stay out of the last 10% of physical deflection, you need to practice.

______________________________________________
If I'm not to use the last 10% anyway why bother to have it set up in the sliders. If the last 10% of physical throw is minor anyway why can't I adjust the slider to take the last 10% out of play? In fact, why bother with sliders at all? Why introduce them into the game? Your logic to me does not make sense. What are your slider settings? Are they different for the planes you choose to fly? Why? Because the limit the feel and response of the aircraft? If yes, then why is there an issue if I(personally) limit my pitch below 100%?

____________________________________________


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
If I pull the stick back allow 100% deflection and the plane stalls, have we not gone beyond the capability of the aircraft? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, you have exceeded the capability of the aircraft but that will NOT happen in all cases, yet your solution will ALWAYS limit your stick force even in cases where it will NOT exceed the capability of the aircraft.

____________________________________________
I never stated stall will happen in all cases. Yes, my stick is limited to prevent any capability the aircraft is not able to do. In this case the limit is set for different aircraft. The Tempest flys best for me at 58 pitch across the board. F4F and Cosair fly best if I start at 69 and step to 83 max. We agree that all aircraft have different slider settings to fly properly, yes?

___________________________________________

Again, if you will actually read my post you will see that I only mention setting the LAST slider to 100%, not all of them. You can set the others to however light you want and STILL be able to get the full 50lbs of stick force when you need it.

__________________________________________
Agreed, last setting can go to 100%. I see your point here. I can go to 100% if I want and it can also create a stall if not careful. Ok cool. I choose not to spend my flying time concentrating on not going there if I have the ability to create an environment that will keep me out of the last 10%
__________________________________________

To sum it up once more, if you can't stay out of the last 10% of physical deflection, YOU NEED MORE PRACTICE. You solution is equivalent to removing part of the elevator because you have trouble over controlling in pitch.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

______________________________________________
And you have a problem with me limiting my stick because of the last 10% of physical deflection and basically without using as many words say I suck? Very nice.
______________________________________________

What I gather here is you believe I should have my pitches last setting at 100%. Since I don't I'm some how a lesser pilot because I cannot control my pitch. Yet, I'm offered up a slider system that helps me obtain a flyable aircaft and enjoyable game. I appreciate you input on my flying ability and what a lousy way of handling a problem, yet I'm to practice to control pitch when I can just move a slider and begin using the game with enjoyment. Odd, I did not ask for personal point by point on my flying. All I posted was a help for lousy pilots like myself a possible answer to the lousy way we fly because we can not control pitch. Did you stop to think that some folks have trouble controlling the aircraft because of personal physical conditions do not allow them too, yet, this individual can use a slider system to help with their physical problem and enjoy the game? Probably not. Not all that play IL2 are looking for the ultimate sim experience in a game I feel is (IMHO)not a sim. Is it sim like? Yes. Many short comings? Certainly.

WB_Outlaw
02-02-2007, 10:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
All I posted was a help for lousy pilots like myself a possible answer to the lousy way we fly because we can not control pitch. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

All I'm pointing out is that I think it's a poor solution to the problem and that a better solution is to keep the ability to apply the full stick force and practice so that you can stay out of the danger zone without crippling the ability of the aircraft. I don't know of a single IL-2 fighter that can't operate in some regime where a 50lb pull will always exceed the capability of the aircraft. If there are some then yes, limiting the stick pull will not cripple those aircraft but in any other aircraft you are crippling it.

If you read my post again you will see that I stated that it was my OPINION. Also, I originally used the term, "player", not "you". You're the one who asked the question, "If I pull the stick back...", which prompted my response of "you". Get your panties out and relax a bit. It's not a personal attack on you it's just additional information for those people that are reading this thread.

Similarly, based on your original post, which had 100% pitch settings across the board BTW (you really should note it when you make major changes like that), it appeared that you did not fully understand how the physical stick inputs were used by the game. When that happens on a public forum you should expect it to be pointed out and corrected without getting defensive.

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-02-2007, 11:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
All I posted was a help for lousy pilots like myself a possible answer to the lousy way we fly because we can not control pitch. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

All I'm pointing out is that I think it's a poor solution to the problem and that a better solution is to keep the ability to apply the full stick force and practice so that you can stay out of the danger zone without crippling the ability of the aircraft. I don't know of a single IL-2 fighter that can't operate in some regime where a 50lb pull will always exceed the capability of the aircraft. If there are some then yes, limiting the stick pull will not cripple those aircraft but in any other aircraft you are crippling it.
------------------------------------------------
What you state above is all you had to post.
You could have also said,"I find with practice you can have get to that 100% setting and give your aircraft more ability to perform." Not YOU NEED MORE PRACTICE.

-----------------------------------------------

If you read my post again you will see that I stated that it was my OPINION. Also, I originally used the term, "player", not "you". You're the one who asked the question, "If I pull the stick back...", which prompted my response of "you". Get your panties out and relax a bit. It's not a personal attack on you it's just additional information for those people that are reading this thread.

-----------------------------------------------
It is a personal attack when without a doubt stating YOU NEED MORE PRACTICE. Again, a general "With pratice you can get to that 100% with confidence" This seems to cover all who you wish to give additional information.
-----------------------------------------------

Similarly, based on your original post, which had 100% pitch settings across the board BTW (you really should note it when you make major changes like that), it appeared that you did not fully understand how the physical stick inputs were used by the game. When that happens on a public forum you should expect it to be pointed out and corrected without getting defensive.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

------------------------------------------------

Pointing out flaws in ones logic is fine and welcome. Presentation of it is a different story. I will write it like should be(TF has similar notions on handling more dignified display of knowledge):
Here we go:
What you are doing is limiting your aircraft capabilities by using this settings. Specifically pitch in this case as you have limited it to 83 on your sliders. I have found that with practice you can increase that last setting to 100% thus allowing more capabilities of the aircraft to be present. You will not spend so much time in this top 10% range but you have that new ability to do so with the practice. This will result in more enhance game play. You might go right into the 100% on the last slider so you can get the working feel of it now and become dependent on it. But like anything, it is all on what works best for you.

That was not so hard. Statements like "Your solution is a POOR ONE" and "YOU NEED MORE PRACTICE" seems to come over as I'm a complete idiot and should shove my computer and stick on the front lawn for a yard sale. Furthermore, my post states I did not take into consideration pots, stick throws and voltage readings on the stick. I stated these are settings for the common man. Therefore, I don't quite understand where you come about with understanding physical inputs of the stick. It said test and tune are the only thing I did. Disclaimer adder per request of TF. Now that you and one other have completely destroyed the thread with, who in their right mind would want to read throw all the dribble of two individuals for some reason decided to take it upon themselves to point out what a screwed up idea this is and they would never do it because everyone know nothing about nothing? Great job! All that needed to be said is the example I have written above and then move on. But you spent your time telling this idiot he needs to practice. You can not deny that. Nothing personal. BTW my panties are fine. Usually when I hear the panty crack someone is rethinking his thoughts on how the situation was handled.

rnzoli
02-03-2007, 01:55 AM
Let's rephrase things. Limiting the max pitch to 80 or 90% is a GOOD TEMPORARY SOLUTION to avoid stalling in aircraft that you don't know well, or when you don't want to think about limiting your own pull on the stick.

I was flying with 80% for a couple of months, it was quite nice to get to know the P-39 variants http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif However, I started to meet situation when I needed that extra pull, e.g., when doing tank attacks in Bf-110s, and not being able to pull out. Pulling to max stick deflection will not stall you in every case, I think it depends on your speed and elevator trim position as well.

So when 1946 came, I reverted to the 100% on all sliders and try to take care about not pulling too much during combat. Awareness about this also helps me to keep my head generally cooler, thinking always 5-10 seconds ahead of what I am doing. I can see why this type of flying is not everyone's cup of tea, but certainly it takes more practice, discipline form the player, while it allows flying the favourite planes in a larger envelope.

NonWonderDog
02-03-2007, 06:39 AM
What works for me is to set the sliders in a logarithmic curve (starting at 50), rather than the normal parabola or straight line (starting at 0). In my experience, what makes you stall is the ridiculous increase in sensitivity the normal settings give you at the mid-point of the stick deflection, and not the high stick deflection itself. If you yank on the stick (and these settings mean you're *always* yanking on the stick around 50% deflection), you're much more likely to stall. And if you move the stick slowly, you can usually recover from any stalls within a half second and continue on. All 100's would actually be the best solution to the increasing sensitivity, but the movement about the center is a bit too twitchy that way. Limiting the maximum deflection isn't really needed or useful.

AVGWarhawk
02-03-2007, 07:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rnzoli:
Let's rephrase things. Limiting the max pitch to 80 or 90% is a GOOD TEMPORARY SOLUTION to avoid stalling in aircraft that you don't know well, or when you don't want to think about limiting your own pull on the stick.

I was flying with 80% for a couple of months, it was quite nice to get to know the P-39 variants http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif However, I started to meet situation when I needed that extra pull, e.g., when doing tank attacks in Bf-110s, and not being able to pull out. Pulling to max stick deflection will not stall you in every case, I think it depends on your speed and elevator trim position as well.

So when 1946 came, I reverted to the 100% on all sliders and try to take care about not pulling too much during combat. Awareness about this also helps me to keep my head generally cooler, thinking always 5-10 seconds ahead of what I am doing. I can see why this type of flying is not everyone's cup of tea, but certainly it takes more practice, discipline form the player, while it allows flying the favourite planes in a larger envelope. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well put!!!! It is that taking care on not pulling hard on the stick that gets me in trouble and I suspect others! Adjusting the pitch slider and limiting it is my safety net for the moment. No doubt, I will loose some ability to perform as a result using this method but, the longer I play the better I will become and then moving that last slider to 100% on pitch will give me that extra edge. Currently I have the last slider on pitch set at 82%. I guess one could slowly move up this last value and working the extra values until 100% is achieved. Then you have complete control of aircraft and command all its capabilities. As previously posted, the last 100% value when I first loaded up the game made a very difficult game to enjoy. I like your line of thinking here and I believe you have given me a great plan of attack to moving that last nasty slider on pitch to 100% http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

WB_Outlaw
02-03-2007, 07:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Statements like "Your solution is a POOR ONE" and "YOU NEED MORE PRACTICE" seems to come over as I'm a complete idiot and should shove my computer and stick on the front lawn for a yard sale. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry you took it that way. Note that those are YOUR emphasis on "poor one", not mine. Also, I emphasise those things that I feel are very important and PRACTICE is one of those things. Maybe it's b/c my field of work is very competetive and there are no right/wrong solutions to a problem (as long as the problem is solved) but I WANT people to point out problems and flaws in those cases (and there are plenty) where I devise poor solutions. Maybe it's just me though.

Also, I have never made any reference to the gamer/simmer BS that sometimes gets thrown around here so quit implying that I'm an elitist looking down on the "common" player.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Furthermore, my post states I did not take into consideration pots, stick throws and voltage readings on the stick. I stated these are settings for the common man. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is true, but, your response to me was that unless I'm using an X-52 I should shut-up b/c it's apples to oranges. I disagree with that when the point of the post is limited to the last 10% of physical input and I explained why.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
All that needed to be said is the example I have written above and then move on. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If that was your wish then why did you repeatedly respond argumentatively to nearly every counter point brought up by others? If you simply couldn't resist responding, all you needed to say was something like...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Thanks for your input and the additional information about how the limiting of stick force could impact the aircraft performance. Hopefully this new information will help those having trouble make more informed decisions about how best to setup their stick. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But you didn't handle it that way. Instead you argued with every point despite the fact that the responses (at least mine) contained wording such as, "...I think..." and "...IMO...".

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Disclaimer adder per request of TF. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unless I am insane, which is almost certainly true, the disclaimer wasn't the only thing you edited. In your original post (although I may be thinking of the duplicate in another forum) your pitch settings were 100% across the board and you roll settings were the ones reduced.

--Outlaw.

WB_Outlaw
02-03-2007, 07:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
What works for me is to set the sliders in a logarithmic curve (starting at 50), rather than the normal parabola or straight line (starting at 0). In my experience, what makes you stall is the ridiculous increase in sensitivity the normal settings give you at the mid-point of the stick deflection, and not the high stick deflection itself. If you yank on the stick (and these settings mean you're *always* yanking on the stick around 50% deflection), you're much more likely to stall. And if you move the stick slowly, you can usually recover from any stalls within a half second and continue on. All 100's would actually be the best solution to the increasing sensitivity, but the movement about the center is a bit too twitchy that way. Limiting the maximum deflection isn't really needed or useful. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's EXACTLY how my pitch is setup NWD and my experience was exactly the same as yours. Having the sensitivity low near the center made for some quick movements that rapidly approached the very steep curves near the end of travel.

I wish my two favorite planes (109 and 190) didn't perform so differently in the roll. I have to keep it high for the 109 but that makes the 190 twitchy. Since I don't want to be disconnecting from servers everytime I switch aircraft I just have to live with it. Did I mention lately how badly we need per aircraft stick scaling?

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-03-2007, 07:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
What works for me is to set the sliders in a logarithmic curve (starting at 50), rather than the normal parabola or straight line (starting at 0). In my experience, what makes you stall is the ridiculous increase in sensitivity the normal settings give you at the mid-point of the stick deflection, and not the high stick deflection itself. If you yank on the stick (and these settings mean you're *always* yanking on the stick around 50% deflection), you're much more likely to stall. And if you move the stick slowly, you can usually recover from any stalls within a half second and continue on. All 100's would actually be the best solution to the increasing sensitivity, but the movement about the center is a bit too twitchy that way. Limiting the maximum deflection isn't really needed or useful. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I believe you are right that the ultimate goal on the sliders is 100% for the last value. This will give you the best window of opportunity to use all the capabilites of a given aircraft. As far as limiting the pitch as I have, I can say it is needed in my case because of the lack of keeping out of max range that puts me in the drink/dirt. But RNzoli has made me think that using this safety net, others might consider it, as a form of getting to the ultimate goal of 100% on the last slider, I could slowly move up the slider day by day until I truly have complete facility over the aircraft.

Honestly, I installed 1946. I attempted flight with the defaults. No dice. I moved my sliders to the old patch settings I once had. Better but still stalling now and then. Getting frustrated and ready to uninstall the game, the last slider on pitch was moved to 82%. USN planes now fly nicely. Flight is now smooth and with command. Even with that said, I'm still able to get a bead on others and perform quite well, even if that last bit of deflection is not available to me. Ultimately, I believe I will move up the slider in incremets until 95% is achieved on pitch. Why 95%? Because at that point, for me, the nose is too sensitive and keeping steady is much too difficult. Probably more of personal taste once the last 10% is achieved.

AVGWarhawk
02-03-2007, 07:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
What works for me is to set the sliders in a logarithmic curve (starting at 50), rather than the normal parabola or straight line (starting at 0). In my experience, what makes you stall is the ridiculous increase in sensitivity the normal settings give you at the mid-point of the stick deflection, and not the high stick deflection itself. If you yank on the stick (and these settings mean you're *always* yanking on the stick around 50% deflection), you're much more likely to stall. And if you move the stick slowly, you can usually recover from any stalls within a half second and continue on. All 100's would actually be the best solution to the increasing sensitivity, but the movement about the center is a bit too twitchy that way. Limiting the maximum deflection isn't really needed or useful. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's EXACTLY how my pitch is setup NWD and my experience was exactly the same as yours. Having the sensitivity low near the center made for some quick movements that rapidly approached the very steep curves near the end of travel.

I wish my two favorite planes (109 and 190) didn't perform so differently in the roll. I have to keep it high for the 109 but that makes the 190 twitchy. Since I don't want to be disconnecting from servers everytime I switch aircraft I just have to live with it. Did I mention lately how badly we need per aircraft stick scaling?

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Outlaw,

I know you have the X52, what are your settings on pitch? Currently I use 52 as the start point and step up to 82 as the max. The reason I ask is I would like to put your values in and try it. I know that all planes need different set ups which is a pain in the rear going in and out of game. In your opinion, is there a good middle ground setting on the X52 that could cover a wide range of aircraft thus preventing the changing all the time?

AVGWarhawk
02-03-2007, 07:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Statements like "Your solution is a POOR ONE" and "YOU NEED MORE PRACTICE" seems to come over as I'm a complete idiot and should shove my computer and stick on the front lawn for a yard sale. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry you took it that way. Note that those are YOUR emphasis on "poor one", not mine. Also, I emphasise those things that I feel are very important and PRACTICE is one of those things. Maybe it's b/c my field of work is very competetive and there are no right/wrong solutions to a problem (as long as the problem is solved) but I WANT people to point out problems and flaws in those cases (and there are plenty) where I devise poor solutions. Maybe it's just me though.

Also, I have never made any reference to the gamer/simmer BS that sometimes gets thrown around here so quit implying that I'm an elitist looking down on the "common" player.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Furthermore, my post states I did not take into consideration pots, stick throws and voltage readings on the stick. I stated these are settings for the common man. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is true, but, your response to me was that unless I'm using an X-52 I should shut-up b/c it's apples to oranges. I disagree with that when the point of the post is limited to the last 10% of physical input and I explained why.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
All that needed to be said is the example I have written above and then move on. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If that was your wish then why did you repeatedly respond argumentatively to nearly every counter point brought up by others? If you simply couldn't resist responding, all you needed to say was something like...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Thanks for your input and the additional information about how the limiting of stick force could impact the aircraft performance. Hopefully this new information will help those having trouble make more informed decisions about how best to setup their stick. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But you didn't handle it that way. Instead you argued with every point despite the fact that the responses (at least mine) contained wording such as, "...I think..." and "...IMO...".

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Disclaimer adder per request of TF. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unless I am insane, which is almost certainly true, the disclaimer wasn't the only thing you edited. In your original post (although I may be thinking of the duplicate in another forum) your pitch settings were 100% across the board and you roll settings were the ones reduced.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are correct on the last edit point. I mis-matched pitch and roll. Good thing I do not attempt to fly the space shuttle http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif Anyway, now that we are past the forum ediquette and response method of two cavemen attempting to enjoy this lovely creation of Oleg, lets find some good hard solutions for people like me who would be better off as ground crew than pilots http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

WB_Outlaw
02-03-2007, 10:38 AM
I did a little more tweaking this morning and I think I'm going to stick with this for a while and see how it goes...

Roll: 5 10 15 20 30 40 55 70 85 100
Pitch: 25 30 35 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Yaw: 2 9 16 24 30 38 49 61 77 100

As my response to NWD said, for the 190 I would like to max the roll out at something around 70 or maybe even less as even at that limit it will still out roll just about anything else. I can't do that though since I also dig the 109 and the ailerons tend to get pretty heavy even at fairly low speeds. Note that my definition of "low speed" is anything less than 400kph.

The 109 also gets very heavy on the elevator very quickly so I don't want to drop the pitch down too much. When I fly the 190 I just have to concentrate on being as smooth as possible. I try to ease the stick to where I think it should be, not yank it there. Yes the inputs are slower but it helps to prevent accelerated stalls and over controlling.

I think I'm going to drop the rudder response down lower in the 70/80/90% bands to see if I can get a bit smoother. It doesn't take much rudder to fly coordinated anyway so maybe it will be worth a shot. Of course for the rudder you absolutely need the 100 at the end to help on the taxi-ways.

Those are my compromises at this point. If I change anything any further I'll post the new numbers.

--Outlaw.

WB_Outlaw
02-03-2007, 10:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rnzoli:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
A low end stick (ie 8 bit A/D converter) will also increase the tendency to stall due to the larger incremental force inputs. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Outlaw, do you happen to know the resolution of mid-range sticks like X-45 and X-52, or the high end sticks like CH's? Do they all have 10-bit A/D? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

RZ,

The X-52 is 11 bit on the stick (2048 discrete values) and 8 bit (256 values) on the throttle.

The Saitek pedals are 7 bit (128 values) on the brakes and 8 bit on the rudder.

At least those are the numbers that the stick is reporting to Windows. There could be some hardware interpolation going but there's no way to tell that unless Saitek offers it up.

The Saitek drivers replace the Windows properties panel for the stick so I plugged my spare X-52 into my notebook so I could use the regular Windows properties to calibrate the stick and get the raw numbers.

I have no idea bout the CH stuff but I doubt if it's higher on the stick and probably the same everywhere else.

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-03-2007, 11:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
I did a little more tweaking this morning and I think I'm going to stick with this for a while and see how it goes...

Roll: 5 10 15 20 30 40 55 70 85 100
Pitch: 25 30 35 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Yaw: 2 9 16 24 30 38 49 61 77 100

As my response to NWD said, for the 190 I would like to max the roll out at something around 70 or maybe even less as even at that limit it will still out roll just about anything else. I can't do that though since I also dig the 109 and the ailerons tend to get pretty heavy even at fairly low speeds. Note that my definition of "low speed" is anything less than 400kph.

The 109 also gets very heavy on the elevator very quickly so I don't want to drop the pitch down too much. When I fly the 190 I just have to concentrate on being as smooth as possible. I try to ease the stick to where I think it should be, not yank it there. Yes the inputs are slower but it helps to prevent accelerated stalls and over controlling.

I think I'm going to drop the rudder response down lower in the 70/80/90% bands to see if I can get a bit smoother. It doesn't take much rudder to fly coordinated anyway so maybe it will be worth a shot. Of course for the rudder you absolutely need the 100 at the end to help on the taxi-ways.

Those are my compromises at this point. If I change anything any further I'll post the new numbers.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, I see where you have 100 for each slider to give everything she has. Your other values and I'm an idiot concerning these, why do you have them stepped this way? The reason I ask because these values I set 100 all the way across as noted. When I twist my stick or lean the stick, the movable surfaces will only go as far as I move the stick. When I go to full bore roll or rudder I then get the 100%. The x52 moves with my hand movement. How do these values in the IL2 sliders affect what is going on? At any rate, I will give these a go because now I understand the 100% deal on the end sliders but do not comprehend the other values when it seems the stick is already dialing deflection.

rnzoli
02-03-2007, 12:50 PM
@ Outlaw, excellent info, I think I will look into the possibility to upgrade my home-made stick (using Logitech firmware) with LBodnars A/D controller, but interesting to note, that it is also 10-bit only (1024 values). In this respect, X-52 must be outstanding in smoothness (2048 values). The biggest I heard so far was a modded Cougar with 12 bit (4096 values).


@ AVGQWarhawk: I recomment you to try this utility, it will give you a much very good visual display on how the settings effect your in-game response. I have it myself, and instead of setting the sliders in game, I can fiddle with it in a much broader way with this utility.

JoyControl http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=1021

WB_Outlaw
02-03-2007, 01:00 PM
Each slider represents 10% of physical deflection. This deflection divides the 50lbs of force. So, if you have 100% for each slider, each 10% of physical deflection will represent 5lbs of force. So, at 20% deflection you will be exerting 10lbs of force on the virtual stick. Once again that's with all sliders set to 100%.

The slider is a weighting factor that is applied to that incremental 5lbs of force that each 10% of physical deflection represents. So, if you set your first slider (the first 10% of physical deflection) to 50% and all the others to 100%, then you will only get 2.5lbs applied to the stick for the first 10% of physical deflection. The next 10% of physical deflection will take you to 10lbs so it represents 7.5lbs of force. The rest of the range is now an even 5lbs just like before.

Each additional slider works the same way so if you set all your sliders to 50%, then each 10% of physical deflection will represent 2.5lbs of force and the total will be 25lbs.

Let's say that you set all the sliders EXCEPT the last on to 50% and set the last one to 100%. Your first 90% of physical deflection will give you 22.5lbs of force. The last 10% of deflection will represent the entire remainder or 27.5lbs. While this does give you the full 50lbs of force you had better be real careful when you hit that last 10% of deflection b/c a small amount of deflection now represents a huge amount of force.

That's why I never have a large step right at the end because if you accidentally jerk the stick into it you're going to be pulling real hard on the virtual stick.



--Outlaw.

bchivers3377
02-03-2007, 01:35 PM
To get a little OT. have you come up with any settings for the X52 for trimming the plane. I like to use the rotaries but they are too sensitive.
I like very much your stick settings, been playing with them a couple of nights now and they are the best that I have used.

deepo_HP
02-03-2007, 01:38 PM
i stopped reading at page 4, although i found the topic interesting.

i just got lost, because the topic starter in first order as well as some responders have the nasty habit to answer by including complete quotes, which include complete quotes including complete quotes.
contrary to stick forces, posts don't get stronger by making them unreadable. quoting lines of interest to point out statements, which are then answered, do though.

CarpeNoctem43
02-03-2007, 01:57 PM
Well last night I was on 334th server w/4.04m.

I was on there about 4 hours and scored my highest score ever with the settings! 910. That was with a -100 TK too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I had up'd the pitch to about 77 across the board, but roll and yaw was 100's the whole night.

I was still loosing a lot of fights, but that is my own fault. (Forever ACM/BFM NOOB)

I can do the same with only half the deflection of the stick and without plane buffeting, as with curves.

I was still at 100% pitch on the JS a bit, but I may try a reverse curve for that.

from 100-70 I think .


-Rick

CarpeNoctem43
02-03-2007, 02:23 PM
I think it's only fair to state:

1. that with the score online
2. that now I can take out 4 ACE Spit 25lbs with an 109 F-4 (where I couldn't even take 4 ACES '41 with '44 plane before)
3. plus the fact that I am a recovering Forever NOOB

The original post is worth trying.


I think it's a disgrace that some people find it reasonable to attack a person who:

1. Finds an identifiable helpful 'tip'
2. Offers it to the community

Just absolutely disgusting and this is the reason there is no reasonable debates - just fist-to-cuff arguments anymore.

If he's incomplete or even wrong keep the discussion going, but in a reasonable manner. This 'because Oleg says' or 'because the manual says' mentality is preposterous. I've tried those settings and wasn't impressed at all - and probably put forth due to the majority of joysticks out there. The $20 sticks with 8bit A/D with a resolution gap the size of Texas.

-Rick

AVGWarhawk
02-03-2007, 03:03 PM
@rz I will check this out for sure.

@outlaw now I have some understanding to the step with IL2 sliders. Each value is giving a force in lbs. If I read this correctly, it is translating force into lbs so 100% tranlates to full 50lbs. If this deduction of mine is correct then I got a grasp.


@BC I have trim on turn knobs on my stick. Once aloft I trim and forget it. Usually though once set in the game it stays put when I respawn. I have seen trim flyers and I have no desire to play that way. Too much going on already.

@Carp, glad to see your enjoying the game with this set up. We must take a look at what Outlaw is saying. Our top slider for pitch/roll/yaw need to be at 100%. If not we limit the aircraft as well as our selves. Personally I think I will stick with 95% max so if I do jerk the stick, I can still stay out of the no stall zone. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif After Outlaw and I beat our keyboards into submission the smoke has cleared Outlaw has been quite informative with X52 as he has one with pedals. With that said, and we all agree, each plane has different setups and each set up is to prefered taste. I plan on trying Outlaws settings and see how she goes. He has stated his case on the last slider and it also has a lot of merit.I will tweek for playability after that. I have seen that reverse curve deal and that whole set up is beyond me. I don't think I will ever figure that one out. I have seen another with that setup. It is all what works for each individual but darn, you always sit there wondering if you getting everything out of your X52 that she can muster!

WB_Outlaw
02-03-2007, 03:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bchivers3377:
To get a little OT. have you come up with any settings for the X52 for trimming the plane. I like to use the rotaries but they are too sensitive.
I like very much your stick settings, been playing with them a couple of nights now and they are the best that I have used. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You must really cut down the sensitivity to use the rotaries on the X-52. It is possible but even at it's best it's not great.

I built a custom trim setup for my cockpit using Bodnar's 10 bit joystick controller...

http://www.whtboys.org/il-2/trimsetup/trimsetup01.jpg

http://www.whtboys.org/il-2/trimsetup/trimsetup02.jpg

http://www.whtboys.org/il-2/trimsetup/trimsetup03.jpg

The controller is mounted inside the small box sitting on the floor and the external connections are just #6 machine screws. The 24 screws on the top are for the 8 analog axes and the screws on the side are the 6x6 matrix for the buttons. Currently the only button I have setup is for manual prop pitch and it's mounted on the top of the prop pitch lever.

The elevator trim pot is a 10 turn precision pot which costs about $15. The others are just the junk you can get from Radio Shack for a couple of bucks or so. This works about 600 grabillion times better than the stuff on the X-52 but between the controller and the components it costs about $100.

Below are my settings for those axes...

Elevator Trim: 1 3 5 10 15 25 45 70 85 100
Aileron Trim: 0 2 7 12 18 25 35 45 65 85 100
Prop Pitch: 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 110
Rudder Trim: 2 7 13 20 30 40 55 70 85 100

AVGWarhawk
02-03-2007, 03:45 PM
Good God Outlaw! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif You said you had an X52 but not that is was attached to F16 cockpit http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif You would have a good laugh at my idea of a cockpit. Shaped like a T. Three pieces of wood. Two that pinch my desktop(slide off when I'm done) and then I have the third piece that creates the T. On each end of this piece I have screwed in my throttle and stick. Works well because the sticks are at my arm angle and is very comfortable. I did spray paint it black. Whats up with yours LOL. If you have not painted yet what do you think about some textured paint on yours?

deepo_HP
02-03-2007, 03:57 PM
still i find the article of 'riki' about
joystick sensitivity (http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/sensitivity.htm)
an excellent lecture, which is nicely adopted into the above mentioned 'joystick control'-utility.
personally i like higher slider values more, and would prefer probably all set to 100, if i had a stick of the length of, well... those used in real-size airplanes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
outlaws fotos of his arrangement look great, what bothers me in this regard is, that i have most problems with worn out plastic parts after time (the shown cockpit in wood or metal could be dreamy). which is the reason that i start with lower values (center loses soon), but would like to go high soon (so i dont have to deflect the stick much for the nasty squeeking and stuttering due to the plasic disc - i don't like creams to use there). the 'joystick control' allows values higher than 100 (fe to achieve 70% control surface reaction with only 50% joystick defelction), has anyone tried that to work properly? since 4.07 i am not satisfied with my old settings (probably imagination http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif), but have less time to tryout a lot.

Mysticpuma2003
02-03-2007, 05:09 PM
Glad I dipped into this topic, as, even after a year of tweaking, I have just (before reading this) got my X-52 to start working well. The setting on pitch start at 60 and work through a smooth curve to the last one at 100.

Roll is 100 across the board and Yaw starts at 60 and througha curve to 100. It is the first time in agaes that the stick feels 'right'.

However, I will try 100's for Roll and Yaw with 75 on Pitch. I know I'm near, so playing around with this is worth the test.

TRhanks for the advice and here's a suggestion for a spring fix.

Using this method, shown in my video, I increased the Spring tension by at least 50%, and the stick feels much more solid.

They actually stickied this on the Official Saitek forums!

Anyway here's what I posted there:


Okay, after requesting advice on the SimHQ forums about how to increase the spring tension on the X-52, l450l Vex posted back with the answer, but unfortunately had deleted the photos.

Anyway, I managed to do it, and decided to put, using photos, a small video tutorial together with voiceover, on how to make the home-made washer, to put on the X-52, which increases the stiffness of the stick (which always felt too slack before, for me) by about 50/60%.

So with that in mind the video link is here (it's 12.7mb):

http://www.aqwp87.dsl.pipex.com/SpringFix.zip

and you will need the Xvid codec to view it which can be found here (just click on download)

http://www.xvid.org/Downloads.43.0.html

Hope this helps some of you out there, cheers, MP.

AVGWarhawk
02-03-2007, 05:27 PM
@Mystic

For some reason mine feels just right also. I would never believed it. I have stepped the pitch starting at 69 and stopping at 95. I have a steady bead on flyers ahead. The aircraft still turn well. I do, however, keep my yaw at 100 across the board. I'm still wondering if the IL2 slider is best just to limit the stick. Limiting has helped me. At any rate with the last slider at 95 my plane still gets squirrely and buffets. Oh well, I guess I have to learn to stay away from that 95%. I always thought the stick was loose since day one but it is not a bother to me. It works ok after I mounted it on a makeshift throttle and stick board setup. I have not had a stick go out on me yet...knock on wood. I have seen that washer to help with spring weakness. Other than that, I'm satisfied with the X52.

WB_Outlaw
02-03-2007, 05:31 PM
You can also just use the little piece of foam that comes in CD/DVD "cake" packages to stiffen up the X-52 spring. It's easier to do and you can add as many as you need.

The biggest problem I have with the X-52 is that it sticks. I use chap stick around the lip of the ring on the base where the "saucer" slides. My wife came up with that idea and it works great.

The wooden cockpit that I currently use is just a prototype so I'm not going to paint it or anything. The real one will be an all (mostly) aluminum rig. I originally modified my work desk a little bit ala AVG but when I bought a notebook for working, my "old" PC became a dedicated game rig so I could go with the full custom setup. I have CTS and the new rig is much less painful to fly. I am also fortunate enough to have a dedicated game room so the things shown in the photos below are possible.

Here's an old shot before I replaced my POS Cougar and the new trim and prop pitch was added. Note that the seat is from a 1985 Fiero and without the Three Stooges mouse pad none of it works at all.

http://www.whtboys.org/gamedesk2003/images/gen3/lrq.jpg

Here's a shot after I replaced the monitor with a REAL rig.

http://www.whtboys.org/projector/shot3.jpg

--Outlaw.

WB_Outlaw
02-03-2007, 05:39 PM
I can't believe that y'all can do well with yaw at 100 across the board. I bounce all over the place unless I really clamp down on the yaw. Of course, I haven't changed the settings since I got my Saitek pedals and I was using a very old set of game port Thrustmaster pedals before so maybe I'll bump it up and see how it works with the new pedals. I'm about to head out to watch Anderson Silva put a severe smack down on Travis Lutter now but I'll try it tomorrow and post the results.

--Outlaw.

MrMojok
02-03-2007, 06:22 PM
BChivers, about the trim-

What you can do is tone down the total range of your trim settings. in other words, don't have it start at 1 and go to 100... have it start at 3 and go up to 35 or something like that. That's what I did, and I'm not at home so I cannot post the numbers right now, but basically you lose some of the high-end trim range in exchange for having finer control with those rotaries on the X-52 throttle. Losing the high range has not bothered me as I find I normally am only having to trim by small amounts anyway.

I can post the curves I use when I get home, if you like.

AVGWarhawk
02-04-2007, 06:13 AM
The rotory are very sensative. I have trim set up on the throttles two rotory. The larger one for rudder and the small side one for pitch. I trim after take off and leave it alone. Any small turn though is a big change in the aircraft. Is there a way to tone it down on the X52?

AVGWarhawk
02-04-2007, 06:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
I can't believe that y'all can do well with yaw at 100 across the board. I bounce all over the place unless I really clamp down on the yaw. Of course, I haven't changed the settings since I got my Saitek pedals and I was using a very old set of game port Thrustmaster pedals before so maybe I'll bump it up and see how it works with the new pedals. I'm about to head out to watch Anderson Silva put a severe smack down on Travis Lutter now but I'll try it tomorrow and post the results.

--Outlaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are darn familiar with the pots and all the technical inards. Are the pedals internal pots and such the same as Saiteks pots in the stick. Is that even factor? I have my original Thrustmaster in my closet. I guess it is over 8 years old. Still works! It is great at collecting dust! Strap in your new Saitek pedals I'm interested to see the outcome. 1946 has really changed the bar on stick settings. I understand that Oleg did a lot of FM work with this. Perhaps that is our deal here on settings.

bolox00
02-04-2007, 11:03 AM
ProfileRemark=46 test

[rts_joystick]
aileron=0 12 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
brakes=0 0 0 0 0 0 21 32 40 49 50 0
elevator=0 6 16 23 35 44 57 67 79 86 100 0
flaps=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
power=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
pitch=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
rudder=0 25 33 38 44 53 58 66 76 87 100 0
trimaileron=0 4 4 9 12 14 16 18 22 25 28 0
trimelevator=0 10 15 18 25 28 35 40 46 52 58 0
trimrudder=0 10 15 20 25 28 31 36 44 51 57 0

-shows what i'm using for trim controls- curently on a beta innovations plasma-lite- 10 bit resolution using bought pots- however i've used very similar settings on logitech based controller and using rotaries on my cougar.

46 has changed these settings slightly- uping them maybe 10% from previous 50% limits. nowhere near definative setup for me but a good place to start for fighters, however testing is currently on hold due to a broken arm (the input curves are definately undermoddled at the moment http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif )

AVGWarhawk
02-04-2007, 12:05 PM
Yes, 1946 has changed quite a bit when it comes to stick settings. Specifically my X52.

WB_Outlaw
02-04-2007, 09:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
You are darn familiar with the pots and all the technical inards. Are the pedals internal pots and such the same as Saiteks pots in the stick. Is that even factor? I have my original Thrustmaster in my closet. I guess it is over 8 years old. Still works! It is great at collecting dust! Strap in your new Saitek pedals I'm interested to see the outcome. 1946 has really changed the bar on stick settings. I understand that Oleg did a lot of FM work with this. Perhaps that is our deal here on settings. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The pots on the Saitek pedals are 8 bit and yes, it is one of the factors that determines the smallest increment of force you can apply. With 8 bit A/D you have 256 individual positions (0-255) so if you have your sliders at 100% across the board you can apply force in .39lb increments. This assumes that you can physically move the control unit (stick/pedal/twisty) 1 bit at a time. I can't do this with anything. The IL-2 Joy Control utility will show how smoothly you can move your physical controls.

I tried 100% across the board for yaw and it was a disaster. The nose was all over the place and aiming was absolutely impossible. This is just a guess but I think that might be a bigger factor in your spin problems than the pitch. I went back to the previous yaw settings I posted earlier.

From what I've read, the only flight model changes in 1946 were some small tweaks and I didn't notice hardly any change at all regarding the stick inputs. Of course, my inputs were toned down quite a bit already so I wasn't having some of the problems that some were reporting.

I also changed my rudder and aileron trim settings so that they end up at about 50%. I keep the elevator trim all the way up to 100% for pulling out of high speed dives. Dropping the trim settings will make it easier to trim using the X-52 rotaries.


--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-05-2007, 10:08 AM
Where do I locate the trim setting for the X52 to make the adjustments? They are quite sensitive to very small changes.

As far as pedals, I suspect I could not fly using pedals no matter what the settings. Just one of those things that my brain can not work out.

WB_Outlaw
02-05-2007, 10:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Where do I locate the trim setting for the X52 to make the adjustments? They are quite sensitive to very small changes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would use IL-2 Joy Control (someone posted a link in a previous post) but you can also just edit the conf.ini file with any text editor if you prefer.

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-05-2007, 10:14 AM
I will have to take a look at that for sure. I'm slowly moving up the slider to end at 100%...get all I get from the aircraft like you stated http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

CarpeNoctem43
02-06-2007, 12:01 PM
Okay guys and gals, now I'm getting confused as to the ultimate goal here, once again. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

So let me recap in a single post what the bottom line is, and maybe I can talk my mind back on track here.

First, Warhawk states that maximizing roll and yaw while setting the pitch to some value less than 100 across the board will allow you great settings that prohibit you from stalling. His test bed is an X52 flying heavy US fighters. Tested and it does just that also in a 109 F-4.

Secondly, Outlaw states that any value less than 100% in the 100 slider limits the forces for pitch. That makes complete sense and it really does. Outlaws contention is that if you get into a high speed dive, you may not have enough authority to pull out. Outlaw also states that if someone stalls a lot with 100 in 100 than that person needs to practice more. A reasonable observation.

Lastly, others have pointed out that high values in the lower ranges, regardless of axis, make it difficult to line up shots. (I don't think so, but thats me) Another reasonable statement.

I think thats about sums up the topic. Where I am getting confused is that with all the oppinions, nothing seems too much better than the other.

Warhawk's will help you with stalling but its a bear for some to line up shots.

Outlaws gives you the full force capabilities and allows small settings in the lower ranges for lining up shots.

With all the bouncing back and forth maybe it's good to ask ourselves what's important. For me, I want maximize my dog fighting capabilities. I can get a plane out of a high speed dive even without full authority - just by not getting into a dive I can't get out of.

My goal is TnB and BnZ capabilities comparable to the guys locked onto my six all the time. Granted this mainly has to do with my skills, or lack thereof. But I want to eliminate the easy stuff first - equipment and settings. Then I want to work on my knowledge of the environment (I.e. max performance turn speed and time of a Bf-109 F-4) Finally I want to work on manuevers (scissors, yo-yo, etc).

If you have a linear progression or a curve setting on your pitch, in these ranges there is a large difference in force between one 'bar' and the next. (80-90 26% difference, 90-100 24% diff) This results in small movements having large effects. So, more likely to mess-up, stall or move out of the max curve etc.

If you set the pitch up with 72's across the board these differences are reduced to 12.5% and 11% respectively giving you a smoother transition. But you limit your max to 36 ft lbs. You get the same differences with 100's across the board with no reduction of max.

If you set up a reverse curve, as a previous poster with screen shots (sorry I forget who), he was able to reduce this even further to 11% / 10% but also limited himself to 41.5 ft lbs.

Now, what I notice in dogfights is invariably it gets low, slow and turning quickly. The turns are generally executed with the stick deflection between 80-100 percent, the high ranges. If dogfights are fought in these ranges it's my position that we should tune these ranges to give the least amount of problems and the greatest reasonable flexibility or control.

I don't think that dogfights SHOULD be fought with 100% deflection or force applied. I think its a serious waste of energy. I don't think it will turn you any faster or climb any higher. To turn the fastest you need to fly the plane at your max performance turn , correct? (coordinated is helpful too to a real extent)

I think that's @ 310kph below 2000 meters for a 109F4 without combat flaps. Doing that, it should turn completely in 19.5 seconds I think. (I think that's what IL2 Wingman states). To do that, I don't need anywhere near 100% force on the stick. And applying 100% force will have adverse effects namely slowing you down TOO much.

Slowing you down too much, while may decrease your turn time, it will decrease your speed too and your radius. Too much in my oppinion. If you think about it, the other guy while you are turning on a dime and not making any forward progress, is pulling away from you and probably moving further down the side of your ship towards your six. He is maintaining E while you (or I) am bleeding E like gangbusters.

Now, if turning @ max performance is your best bet for success in a TnB dogfight, then settings to ensure and maximimize and limit you to this are the orders of the day.

Anything with 100% in the last column will not prohibit you from placing the airplane in an unflyable attitude. Also, in this configuration there is way to much 'difference' in these higher, dogfight, ranges which means it becomes more likely that slight movements will cause big problems. It will give that extra at the end of the range - but if the above paragraph is true about flying correctly then, 'to what benefit is it?'

In the end we need a set of settings (for each plane we fly) that

1. Minimizes the possibility of putting the airplane in an unflyable condition.
2. Minimizes the differences between settings progressions as much as possible.
3. Maximizes airplane performance and capabilities by placing your max turning in the middle of the curve. (This way you have the maximum capability of your stick to counter deviations from max performance AND slight deviations do not affect in disasterous ways)
4. Give enough 'precision' to place rounds on target.


To do all of these what about something like the following set for pitch?

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Max 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Setting 80 85 90 95 100 100 95 90 85 80
Output Force 4 8.5 13.5 19 25 30 33.25 36 38.25 40
Difference 112.5% 58.8% 40.7% 31.6% 20.0% 10.8% 8.3% 6.3% 4.6%



These numbers aren't based on any tests yet, I was playing with the numbers in excel to see what they produced and I like this. Seems a bell curve may solve each of the above 4 points. I'll try them tonight and see what's up.

I am convinced if we put max performance settings as close to the middle as possible, then we will have freedoms to limit ourselves and thus prohibit stalls.

Best regards,

Rick

AVGWarhawk
02-06-2007, 02:40 PM
@carpe

Those are some wild numbers. Let us know what happens. I also started looking into trim for coordinated flight in combat. Others say this was used in combat(gave RL examples) and have some valid points. The only trim I'm talking about is for pitch only. Trim as I understand it removes the heavy forces on the pilots stick. It also helps in a coordinated turn. Anyway, I'm looking into this especially with our strange settings that seem to work. I interested in how the aircraft perform.

KaleunFreddie
02-06-2007, 03:33 PM
Missed a lot of this conversation..

OutLaw - very nice rig http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Think a BIG problem with most of your stick setups is that you're trying to emulate a real plane. Remember Oleg has always stated that this is a simulation, not the real thing - close at it might be http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

I've tried all those setups that you've indicated and find them very inferior for combat. Afraid so.. With the settings I've indicated on page 2, I guarantee that I will be able to flip a FW190 onto your Zero's 6. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Not only a FW, any plane, and when we're in the same planes, you're dead meat!!.

I think it comes down to essentially knowing how to use the sliders... from there it's just tactics.
It's just a pity I, and a few others are too far away (pingwise) to prove this theory, but ... in good time
and AVGWarhawk, don't be influenced by 'followers', do it differently and be a 'Leader'. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

KaleunFreddie
02-06-2007, 03:43 PM
Another quip.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
I like to fly my planes on the edge of losing control, and in this region you learn to fly for real, flying into 'out of control' and back 'into control'. You should try it as it great fun and really challenging, but when you get it right there's no stopping you.
Anybody can fly E, but only a few can fly in 'permanent stall'.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

WB_Outlaw
02-06-2007, 05:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KaleunFreddie:
With the settings I've indicated on page 2, I guarantee that I will be able to flip a FW190 onto your Zero's 6. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Not only a FW, any plane, and when we're in the same planes, you're dead meat!!. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What is it about YOUR settings that will make your aircraft perform better than mine? The only difference in roll is the sensitivity and the difference in pitch is that you can only exert 41.5lbs of force while I can exert 50lbs. Assuming the aircraft is capable, I can pull a higher G turn that you can in ANY aircraft and I can roll just as fast. I think it's you that is misunderstanding the use of the sliders.

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-06-2007, 05:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KaleunFreddie:
Missed a lot of this conversation..

OutLaw - very nice rig http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Think a BIG problem with most of your stick setups is that you're trying to emulate a real plane. Remember Oleg has always stated that this is a simulation, not the real thing - close at it might be http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

I've tried all those setups that you've indicated and find them very inferior for combat. Afraid so.. With the settings I've indicated on page 2, I guarantee that I will be able to flip a FW190 onto your Zero's 6. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Not only a FW, any plane, and when we're in the same planes, you're dead meat!!.

I think it comes down to essentially knowing how to use the sliders... from there it's just tactics.
It's just a pity I, and a few others are too far away (pingwise) to prove this theory, but ... in good time
and AVGWarhawk, don't be influenced by 'followers', do it differently and be a 'Leader'. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Salute Kaleun! All the aircraft need a different set up. I should have been more clear on the aircraft I toy around with. These settings are for the heavy USN planes/P40/P51 and not bad for the Tempest/Spitfires. The FW190 is a breed in itself. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif Currenlty I'm working with trim on my X52 and attempting to get a good feel on it. Many say it is a feature in another heated thread, no doubt trimming was an integal part of good combat flying. As far as your additional post, yes, fly on the edge of disaster but learn to stay out of it. Like Blizpig stated keep that last slider at 100% so you can have the ability to go there if needed but practice to stay out of it. I think what I have thus far on the settings for the plane I noted above is a good starting point. Refine, get to 100% learn the use of trim.

See you in the Atlantic!

Lurch1962
02-06-2007, 06:34 PM
Lads,
Read page 1 and jumped to 7, so missed all in between. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

I don't think of the stick slider settings as equating to forces (e.g. pounds), but instead see them as percentages of maximum deflection possible at each mapped position.

Let's look at the elevator for example, using a stick which offers a linear output (which is normally the case). Assume for simplicity that the elevator as modeled in the game allows 10 degrees of up and down deflection from neutral (for a total of 20 degrees).

The first value in the numeric string for the elevator (in conf.ini) tells the game how to modify the stick's output when the pitch axis has been moved 10% from center. Likewise, the second value applies when the pitch axis has been moved 20% from center, and so on. The 10th value modifies output when pitch has been fully deflected, and personally I believe it's important to set this to 100 so that you can obtain the maximum allowed performance (from all control surfaces, for that matter).

(By the way, as you should know, the 11th number sets the dead zone width. I ALWAYS set this to ZERO for crisp response. I hate it when the stick has to be shoved some distance before even the slightest control input is sent!)

If you set all slider values to 100, then your elevator in-game will move exactly in step with your joystick pitch deflections. If you pull your stick back halfway, the game's elevator will move up halfway, or 5 degrees. Pull back 3/4 of the way to the limit, and the elevator will move up 7.5 degrees. And when you pull back fully to the stop, the elevator will move up fully to 10 degrees.

Now, if all slider values were to be set to 50, the elevator would respond across the board by deflecting only half as far as it otherwise should. So, when you pull the stick halfway back, instead of the elevator moving up 5 degrees, it will move only 2.5 degrees. And with a full yank back on the stick, the elevator will deflect upward only 5 degrees instead of the 10 degrees you'd have liked.

Not having a FFB stick, it's hard for me to make the necessarily small deflections required for subtle attitude adjustments, what with the easy action my CH stick has. To compensate, I dampen the response of my stick near the neutral position, which in a crude way "kind of simulates" stick forces.

For smooth control I've set a curved response, in pitch especially, beginning with a near-zero value at the beginning. In this way I have very good control for aiming and T/O and landing, and in a fight I can keep my crate near the edge of stall for extended periods.

=================================

Finally, regarding stick resolution. Seems to me that 8 bits is good enough. In my CH control software the calibration screen shows output over a range of 0-255 (or +/-128). Moving my stick so as to try to make the numbers increment smoothly in single steps is not easy! The way I move my stick even in level flight tells me that higher resolution is unnecessary.

--Lurch--

WB_Outlaw
02-06-2007, 07:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Lurch1962:
I don't think of the stick slider settings as equating to forces (e.g. pounds), but instead see them as percentages of maximum deflection possible at each mapped position.

Finally, regarding stick resolution. Seems to me that 8 bits is good enough. In my CH control software the calibration screen shows output over a range of 0-255 (or +/-128). Moving my stick so as to try to make the numbers increment smoothly in single steps is not easy! The way I move my stick even in level flight tells me that higher resolution is unnecessary.

--Lurch-- </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The stick applies force, not deflection. While you can think about it in terms of deflection, you can't use absolutes (ie, 7.5 degrees) because as speed increases the deflection will decrease with the same physical stick position. Also, it's not linear so it's just best to think of it in terms of what it is (force).

If 8 bits works for you, knock yourself out, however, I can apply very much smaller incremental forces than you can. This will make a HUGE difference when riding the stall b/c while I may be able to add a few ounces and bring it right up to the edge, you won't be able to get that close without going over. This can make it LOOK like my poor turning aircraft out-turned your better turning aircraft when the only difference is I can ride closer to the stall than you can.

--Outlaw.

Lurch1962
02-06-2007, 09:33 PM
Outlaw,
In a real A/C (WWII at least) the relationship between stick movement and control surface deflection is direct at all speeds. After all, the control system consists of non-stretching (or compressing) rods and/or cables.

Whether on the ground at 0 knots or zipping along at hundreds, any given amount of movement of the control column will deflect the relevant control surface by exactly the same amount. It's just that at speed, aerodynamic forces induce a resistive force which the pilot must work harder to overcome.

But I'm sure you already know this. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding how the sim models control surface movement. Does it actually reduce deflection in spite of joystick position?

To clarify with an example, in the Zero at high speed my roll rate is reduced because of (presumably) high stick forces. If I were to look at my ailerons, would they be deflected visibly less than when flying at low speed, in spite of my holding they stick hard to one side? Hmmm... next time I fire up the game I'll have to look for this.

WB_Outlaw
02-06-2007, 09:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Lurch1962:
Outlaw,
In a real A/C (WWII at least) the relationship between stick movement and control surface deflection is direct at all speeds. After all, the control system consists of non-stretching (or compressing) rods and/or cables.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is true, however, the physical stick we use is NOT the virtual stick in the cockpit. The physical stick varies the amount of FORCE the virtual pilot applies to the virtual stick. Read the entire thread if you want more information on how the game models physical stick deflection.

So, 50% PHYSICAL deflection will NOT result in 50% VIRTUAL deflection except at one speed. Since the slider settings affect how much force 50% physical deflection represents it will also affect how much virtual deflection occurs.

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-07-2007, 09:05 AM
@Lurch

Outlaw has a good grasp on the dynamics of the game and emulating RL actions concerning stick movement. Check out the other pages here. Some good things.

CarpeNoctem43
02-09-2007, 12:05 PM
@Warhawk - I tried them crazy numbers offline with 4.08m. I actually tweaked them a little bit for a higher right side and a lower left side. I notice an improvement in centering shots, also I have a lot of athority in the mid range. This by itself is a nice feature.

@Outlaw - You've expressed the theory of flying on the edge of a stall - I think this is where it's at. (flying right on the edge of squeeze every bit of performance out, but no further) But I dont think this (edge of stall) is how to fly all the time.

Do you agree that during a turn its better to fly @ your best turn speed than at your slowest?

How about posting some ntrks guys? with commentary? Id be great to see what is going on in your heads during a dog fight.


-Rick

fordfan25
02-09-2007, 01:05 PM
guys if your haveing realy bad problems with stall's add some filter. i find about half filter is just right. if you decrease the last slider to a value lower than 100% you WILL limite the amout of max control. another words if you fly UFO's like the spit or ....well any USSR fighter you will be shooting your self in the foot. also if you fly a p38 you will be hurting your self as you need as much control athority as you can get with the over moddled compression moddling. i like to start my sliders at 8 ease them up in small amounts till about half way to the last slider and at that point bring them up steeper to the 100%.

this is my current settings

[rts_joystick]
X=0 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100 0
Y=0 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100 0
Z=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
RZ=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
FF=0
U=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
V=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
1X=1 9 18 26 35 45 55 66 76 86 100 40
1Y=1 9 18 26 35 43 52 60 69 79 90 40
1Z=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
1RZ=1 35 43 51 62 72 80 89 95 98 100 10


im just recovering from a reformat so im still in the act of tweaking my settings but those are close. with a filter of 5 on pitch and roll and filter2 for yaw.

fordfan25
02-09-2007, 01:21 PM
[rts_joystick]
X=0 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100 0
Y=0 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100 0
Z=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
RZ=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
FF=0
U=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
V=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
1X=1 9 18 26 35 45 55 66 76 86 100 40
1Y=1 7 13 19 26 32 39 51 64 80 100 40
1Z=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
1RZ=1 35 43 51 62 72 80 89 95 98 100 10


actualy some of you may want to try that. i find in my tempist with my POS cyborg stick those settings allow me a good messure of fine control yet i still have the power to turn in a knife fight and pull outa fast dives. the filter settings are needed to ease the steepness of the cure in the middle or so of the stick pull.

WB_Outlaw
02-09-2007, 01:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CarpeNoctem43:
Do you agree that during a turn its better to fly @ your best turn speed than at your slowest? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That depends on what the situation (defensive vs offensive) and the enemy's skill and his aircraft.

As a pilot, I really suck on a scale that can scarecly be imagined by the mortal mind so I'm not really the one to ask for advice when it comes to combat. The only thing I can say is come down from really high, really fast (or at least as fast as your ride will allow), get really close, and then pull the trigger(s) really hard.

To summarize the above, point your finger at the bandit and go that way really fast. If something gets in your way, turn.

I wouldn't ever advise flying right on the edge of a stall except during landing. If I'm ever in that area of the envelope it's because I screwed up really bad and I will usually die soon after.

--Outlaw.

AVGWarhawk
02-09-2007, 02:01 PM
@fordfan

I see 0 values at the end of X and Y. What is your thinking for these values there? Does putting 100 before the last slider allow you to get 100 faster?

WWSpinDry
02-09-2007, 02:23 PM
@Warhawk: the first and last values in the config file are always zero, so there end up being 12 numbers there. The second through eleventh are the actual ten values represented by the sliders.

I assume all of you guys have looked into this thread:

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5501083073

ETA: interesting info Outlaw, thanks for that!

WB_Outlaw
02-09-2007, 03:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
@fordfan

I see 0 values at the end of X and Y. What is your thinking for these values there? Does putting 100 before the last slider allow you to get 100 faster? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The last number is the filtering value. I think the first one is for the deadzone.

--Outlaw.

fordfan25
02-09-2007, 05:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
@fordfan

I see 0 values at the end of X and Y. What is your thinking for these values there? Does putting 100 before the last slider allow you to get 100 faster? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>i have no idea why thay are there. i didnt put them there. i remember that in past patchs people said that by adding 0's that were missing helped the controls but im realy not sure.

CarpeNoctem43
02-14-2007, 11:07 PM
Well I have been tweaking these numbers out a bit and I am just smitten over these!!!

I tried the bell curve out and it's working like a charm. I use it online and I get really nice scores, at least for me. Not any below 1000 for the past week or so. (And thats with random TK's, you know - get between a dog and his meat sort of thing... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

Most importantly, I am having fun now. No longer am I spitting at the computer threatening to throw it out the window.

I'm still getting shot down with the same frequency - but that's just my inner noob letting me know I'm not above the danger.

Rudder and Elevator respectively:
1RZ1=0 10 35 60 85 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
1Y=0 75 81 87 94 100 100 100 97 94 90 0

Everything else (ailerons, trims) are 100's
Slowly but surely I am increasing the right side of the elevator curve.

I generally fly a Bf 109 F-4 with these settings and it's like butter.

With the 100's starting in the mid range I don't have to go into the high ranges and manuvers like a scissors is easy.

These do good in a FW 190 A-9, but I've only done that offline with bombers. A little squirly in the roll axis - but thats a plus for the FW.

-Rick

AVGWarhawk
02-15-2007, 08:55 AM
I'm glad they are working for you. That bell curve you have going is astonishing!! I'm going try some of the set ups noted above with the '0' value on the last slider. See how this affects the flight with the X52 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

FoolTrottel
02-15-2007, 09:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Most importantly, I am having fun now. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Rick, can you state what stick you are using?

(Can't find that info in your posts here, but that could just be me... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif)

AVGWarhawk
02-15-2007, 11:17 AM
One post he has a Saitek with hotas/rudder. Not sure what model.

Mysticpuma2003
02-15-2007, 11:33 AM
I started a thread (before the web crash!), about posting input setting (RTS) in the conf.ini for people using the X-52.

I have, now, after so long, got a setting that works really well for me.

Unfortunately I am not on my home PC until tomorow evening, but I will post my settings for you to try then.

I now have almost instant response when I move the stick, as before I could move the top approx. 4cm before the plane moved on-screen, now I have the response set so that it works the same as my old Cyborg did.

Really pleased now, again though, stick settings are subjective, it's just that after so long owning an X-52, and then fixing the spring tension, at last I feel like I have a valuable asset!

Cheers, MP.

AVGWarhawk
02-15-2007, 01:50 PM
Let see what you have!!!

badaboom.1
03-09-2007, 05:23 PM
I just bought an X-52,I'm a bit overwhelmed with the options/sliders/buttons.....but I do know that the stick is nowhere near what my old Saitek Cyborg 3D GOLD was,the X52 seems to have terrible response time!well thanks to this thread I will try some of the suggestions...I'd be interested in Mystics' settings.
Thanks

Mysticpuma2003
03-10-2007, 04:22 PM
Apologies....completely forgot!

These settings are for the Joystick and now it plays for me, like a dream. Try them, you may like them, but if you don't, you've only lost a little time.

Cheers, MP.


[rts_joystick]
X=0 13 21 28 39 53 65 77 88 96 100 0
Y=0 22 28 37 45 54 65 77 88 97 100 0
Z=0 35 41 48 56 67 76 82 89 95 100
RZ=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
FF=0
U=0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 100 100 0
V=0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 100 100 0
1X=0 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 100 100 0
1Y=0 67 77 84 91 95 98 100 100 100 100 0
1Z=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
1RZ=0 30 44 56 69 76 83 90 97 100 100 0
1U=1 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
1V=0 6 15 19 32 40 49 61 72 79 100 0
1RX=1 0 11 22 33 44 56 67 78 89 100 0
1RY=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0

badaboom.1
03-10-2007, 04:37 PM
Cheers!!!!ThankYou Sir,I'm going to try right now http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Baylor6
03-13-2007, 11:07 AM
AVGWarhawk,

Thank you for your initial post on settings. I applied them to my X52 and now I can fly and maneuver withoout the continual spins that I was experiencing. Thank you for sharing your findings with the community! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Mysticpuma2003
03-15-2007, 04:05 AM
Were they of any use to you Badaboom?

Cheers, MP.

badaboom.1
03-15-2007, 04:49 PM
Mystic,Yes they're fantastic!!,totally converts the stick into a joy to fly with,Thank You for taking the time to post your settings......I've been to busy programing/flying I didn't get back to you to say http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gifThankYou Sir!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Mysticpuma2003
03-16-2007, 02:58 AM
Excellent. As I have posted before, going from a Cyborg to an X-52.....what a shock!

Much trial and error later, it now plays the way the Cyborg did. I'm sure there is room for improvement, but along with the Spring fix (increased tension on the stick), it now feels, closer to the way, I hoped it would http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Glad they worked, cheers, MP.

Pinker15
03-16-2007, 03:45 AM
I bought an X52 half a year ago and I was verry unpleased for its unaccurancy. Because of this problem I was forced to make new input set. This solves a problem a bit that Im quite pleased now. Heres result of my work. I hope it will help for some of U guys.

[rts_joystick]
X=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
Y=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
Z=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
RZ=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
FF=0
U=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
V=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
1X=0 52 56 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 0
1Y=0 52 56 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 0