• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Star Citizen: Chris Robert`s new space sim (the Wing Commander guy)

Page 148 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

jlee

Lifer
Sep 12, 2001
48,510
219
106
I may get some heat on this, but I personally don't think single-seat ships should even have the option of gimbals. It is impossible IRL for a fighter pilot to fly a craft and simultaneously aim a turret / gimbal - - it just isn't feasible.
IRL pilots are taking out targets before visual range - gun dogfights are a thing of the past. With space flight being commonplace in the SC world, I would assume sufficient tech exists to auto-aim gimballed weapons, though that would put them at a severe advantage.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
IRL pilots are taking out targets before visual range - gun dogfights are a thing of the past. With space flight being commonplace in the SC world, I would assume sufficient tech exists to auto-aim gimballed weapons, though that would put them at a severe advantage.

You're exactly right. We definitely have to fudge here to make a game fun. I mean, this far into the future both ship flight and targeting would likely be controlled almost exclusively by computer, but that would definitely make for a boring game. ;)

You could kind of see the issue coming a mile away though. CIG leveled the field a bit by allowing 1x+ hardpoints if you removed the gimbal, but it could have been avoided entirely if gimbals weren't ever introduced on single-seaters.

Since controller parity was a huge goal from the beginning, it seems like an ill-sighted move on their part to introduce a mechanic that can only be used effectively by one form of controller (mouse). Not only that, but to give that form of controller magic auto-flight capability to go along with it.
 
Last edited:
Feb 4, 2009
31,484
11,880
136
IRL pilots are taking out targets before visual range - gun dogfights are a thing of the past. With space flight being commonplace in the SC world, I would assume sufficient tech exists to auto-aim gimballed weapons, though that would put them at a severe advantage.
In reality it would be very boring. Laser would give enormous range, machines would figure out all the points an object could possible be at any given time and auto shoot a laser beam at that point & time. Most fights would probably be about who detects who first.

Let's have a fun game I'm not a mega realistic one.
 

jlee

Lifer
Sep 12, 2001
48,510
219
106
In reality it would be very boring. Laser would give enormous range, machines would figure out all the points an object could possible be at any given time and auto shoot a laser beam at that point & time. Most fights would probably be about who detects who first.

Let's have a fun game I'm not a mega realistic one.
Yep. I agree entirely.
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
You're exactly right. We definitely have to fudge here to make a game fun. I mean, this far into the future both ship flight and targeting would likely be controlled almost exclusively by computer, but that would definitely make for a boring game. ;)

You could kind of see the issue coming a mile away though. CIG leveled the field a bit by allowing 1x+ hardpoints if you removed the gimbal, but it could have been avoided entirely if gimbals weren't ever introduced on single-seaters.

Since controller parity was a huge goal from the beginning, it seems like an ill-sighted move on their part to introduce a mechanic that can only be used effectively by one form of controller (mouse). Not only that, but to give that form of controller magic auto-flight capability to go along with it.
I agree with this. I'd love to see them eliminate gimbals all together on the smaller ships. Create some type of bullshit lore that they were outlawed under some type of inter-galactic arms treaty or something like that. It could be done. If CIG wanted it done.
 

GoodRevrnd

Diamond Member
Dec 27, 2001
6,799
581
126
They need to get rid of manual gimble aiming imo. Make them auto-lock and improve the accuracy based on the time you hold the lock and your avionics stats versus theirs. I think this would more realistically portray 2950 combat. Alternatively, strictly for gimble aiming a thumbstick style control might be much more effective than a track ball but it's hard to say. Those always get into weird acceleration issues, but if it's purpose designed for this you might be able to do it right. Put that on the throttle, leave the joystick alone.

I also think rudder pedals would be best to handle all your strafing. Pedal twist right pedal forward, strafe right; pedal twist left pedal forward, strafe left. Pedal "throttle" forward, strafe up; pedal "throttle" back strafe down. I realize the center point and ergonomics aren't exactly designed for the up/down but it could work. Joystick Y pitch, X yaw, twist roll.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
I also think rudder pedals would be best to handle all your strafing. Pedal twist right pedal forward, strafe right; pedal twist left pedal forward, strafe left. Pedal "throttle" forward, strafe up; pedal "throttle" back strafe down. I realize the center point and ergonomics aren't exactly designed for the up/down but it could work. Joystick Y pitch, X yaw, twist roll.
I'm using rudder pedals for strafe and I'm very happy with it so far, only with the opposite mapping of what you exampled:

Toe axis: vertical strafe
Slide axis: horizontal strafe

It took a few hours of practice, but once I got it down it felt really natural. Perhaps not as efficient or precise as a dedicated strafe stick, but a huge improvement over using a digital on/off input like a hat.

The coolest thing was being able to combine strafing input. Before when I had it mapped to a hat, I would only strafe one direction at a time. Now I can horizontally strafe while rising or descending.
 
Last edited:

Fallen Kell

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,674
254
126
Pedal "throttle" forward, strafe up; pedal "throttle" back strafe down. I realize the center point and ergonomics aren't exactly designed for the up/down but it could work. Joystick Y pitch, X yaw, twist roll.
You would probably need to merge the 2 independent pedal breaks into a single axis via some virtual joystick software, so that one controls the positive and the other negative and it is zero when neither pedal is pushed.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
You would probably need to merge the 2 independent pedal breaks into a single axis via some virtual joystick software, so that one controls the positive and the other negative and it is zero when neither pedal is pushed.
I haven't had to do any custom axis scripting to get this work on my pedals, but as I noted above, I'm using the opposite mapping of what he suggested. Toe for vertical and slide for horizontal.

The mapper sees the slide axis as a single axis by default, and each toe brake as its own axis.
 
Last edited:

Fallen Kell

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,674
254
126
I haven't had to do any custom axis scripting to get this work on my pedals, but as I noted above, I'm using the opposite mapping of what he suggested. Toe for vertical and slide for horizontal.

The mapper sees the slide axis as a single axis by default, and each toe brake as its own axis.
Yeah, I am still in debate though on how I want to use the toe brakes. Vertical strafe seems to be a good idea, but I think I would much rather have that tied to a thumbstick since I see using it very frequently in conjunction with horizontal (left/right) strafe for defensive manoeuvring (to create spiral movements that are much more difficult to hit). At the same time, forward/reverse strafe/thrust seem to be extremely useful to have on a thumbstick when dealing with decoupled mode and flying through obstacles while at the same time trying to keep your weapons pointed at the enemy (but I think might still be a better case for use on pedals).
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
I agree with this. I'd love to see them eliminate gimbals all together on the smaller ships. Create some type of bullshit lore that they were outlawed under some type of inter-galactic arms treaty or something like that. It could be done. If CIG wanted it done.
I agree. Unfortunately, I could foresee a thermonuclear rage-furball arising from a big chunk of the community if they decided to do it now. :(
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
I agree. Unfortunately, I could foresee a thermonuclear rage-furball arising from a big chunk of the community if they decided to do it now. :(
I wouldn't have a problem with that! I know this is a "bad" attitude to have, but I don't want more Star Citizens. I want fewer. I want only those dedicated to the vision of a space sim and NOT Call of Star Citizen (FPS in Space). I personally believe that CIG has made several decisions (you've noted a few) that are outside of the "vision" and were made for revenue reasons only.

Call me a snob or elitist. Don't care. That's just how I feel!
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
I wouldn't have a problem with that! I know this is a "bad" attitude to have, but I don't want more Star Citizens. I want fewer. I want only those dedicated to the vision of a space sim and NOT Call of Star Citizen (FPS in Space). I personally believe that CIG has made several decisions (you've noted a few) that are outside of the "vision" and were made for revenue reasons only.

Call me a snob or elitist. Don't care. That's just how I feel!

I agree. If this game is going to have longevity, they're going to have to keep the skill ceiling high, even if it turns some people off.

Other MMO's simply use leveling to keep players engaged (always reaching for the next level).

The only leveling in Star Citizen is done between your ears, so if they make concessions to "easy button" core gameplay mechanics, people are going to hit that ceiling quickly and have nowhere to go.

There are ways to balance the game so that newcomers and casual players aren't hopelessly frustrated, but core gameplay should be sacred, and it should stay true to the "sim" approach that was the original vision.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
I'm also seriously hoping in 2.0 the Connie has its new interior in place. The WIP shots look killer.





 
Last edited:

Fallen Kell

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,674
254
126
Well I am going to order a control board that I will use to customize a flight stick. One thing I wish I had was a drill press, but I believe my uncle owns one which I should be able to use (I hope to only need to drill a pilot hole and then use a hole saw to cut out the portion of plastic to fit the thumbstick through). I am debating re-wiring the entire controller to the board I am looking at, or just have my board be seen as just another USB device. I like the idea of it all being one device through.

Here is the control board I am looking at: Teensy 3.2 (it costs $16-20 depending on where you get it):

https://www.pjrc.com/teensy/td_joystick.html

There are a few other modifications people have done to support up to 7 or 8 control axis on the board under windows (under linux, people have been able to get 23 axis to be detected and used, but Windows seems to have problems with that many).

I'm also ordering a Thrustmaster 16000M to hopefully perform this modification on. I believe the removable ergonomic pieces would make for easy modification to add the additional thumbstick (I might also add a few toggle switches for setting things like comstab, g-safe, and possibly flight modes, and ideally look to see if there are switches that can be reset via software such that I can poll the values from the game via API).
 
Last edited:

DeathReborn

Platinum Member
Oct 11, 2005
2,374
285
126
I already have a Warthog, T.16000M & X52 (along with a smattering of CH Pedals, Throttles etc) but I am setting aside £1,000 just for the SC branded controls, might even be enough for 2 so my dad can use the SC ones instead of my old ones.

I have dabbled a little in flying but not for a couple of months and will hold out until maybe middle of 2016 (unless something big launches... Tali...) to avoid getting used to 1 flight model only for it to be replaced.
 

Fallen Kell

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,674
254
126
Yeah, I would really hold off a bit until the new flight model is released (should be very soon) in terms of getting accustomed to the game. I have been trying to not play much right now for that very reason since it is changing. Assuming things go as planned with the new model, I don't see many drastic changes after this one though, so I would start playing right away once it is released to gain as much experience with it as you can.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
Well I am going to order a control board that I will use to customize a flight stick. One thing I wish I had was a drill press, but I believe my uncle owns one which I should be able to use (I hope to only need to drill a pilot hole and then use a hole saw to cut out the portion of plastic to fit the thumbstick through).
I'm interested to hear how this turns out!


I just ordered a T16000 for use as a dedicated strafe stick - - I'm going to give dual-stick an honest go.

CH Fighterstick
Pitch
Yaw

T16000
Horizontal Strafe
Vertical Strafe

CH Pro Pedals
Forward / Reverse Strafe (Toe Brakes)
Roll (slide axis)


So this setup will give me precision analog control over every axis - at the expense of a dedicated analog throttle. This won't be important in combat or racing because forward strafe operates the same way as forward throttle. For extended flight, I'm going to map throttle to the throttle wheel on the Fighterstick base...it has a pretty big range and should work well for that.

The only thing I'm worried about here is the level of control I prefer for roll. The slide axis on the rudder pedals is the least precise movement I will have over all these axes (just because sliding your feet back and forth just isn't as accurate as using your hands or even toe braking). I'm very picky about roll - so we'll see how this goes.


I should have it by Friday so I'll get some hours in this weekend...will report back how it goes.
 
Last edited:

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
I'm interested to hear how this turns out!


I just ordered a T16000 for use as a dedicated strafe stick - - I'm going to give dual-stick an honest go.

CH Fighterstick
Pitch
Yaw

T16000
Horizontal Strafe
Vertical Strafe

CH Pro Pedals
Forward / Reverse Strafe (Toe Brakes)
Roll (slide axis)


So this setup will give me precision analog control over every axis - at the expense of a dedicated analog throttle. This won't be important in combat or racing because forward strafe operates the same way as forward throttle. For extended flight, I'm going to map throttle to the throttle wheel on the Fighterstick base...it has a pretty big range and should work well for that.

The only thing I'm worried about here is the level of control I prefer for roll. The slide axis on the rudder pedals is the least precise movement I will have over all these axes (just because sliding your feet back and forth just isn't as accurate as using your hands or even toe braking). I'm very picky about roll - so we'll see how this goes.


I should have it by Friday so I'll get some hours in this weekend...will report back how it goes.
Interesting layout. If the SC HOTAS ends up not appealing to me, I might just drop another $50, get another T16000 and go dual stick as well.

You could add roll to the T16000, it has twist (and is actually pretty smooth/comfortable in my opinion). Well...it's an option anyway.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
You could add roll to the T16000, it has twist (and is actually pretty smooth/comfortable in my opinion). Well...it's an option anyway.
I will try that....I have a general hatred of twisty sticks, but I've never tried the T16000 - maybe it will change my mind. ;)
 
Last edited:

Fallen Kell

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,674
254
126
I have tried using the twist for left/right strafe in my Sidewinder. I don't have a 16000 yet (looking to see if I can pick one up locally). I did just order 2 of the teensy 3.2 boards. I figure I will attempt to do a simple mod with one (just adding the extra thumbstick) and possibly play with the other creating my own custom controller.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
So I started experimenting early...

I mapped roll and forward / reverse strafe to my pedals.

First surprise, forward strafe no longer gives you full throttle speed (I could have swore it did).

No problem, I remapped throttle to right toe and kept reverse strafe on the left toe, then mapped throttle 2 to the Fighterstick throttle wheel.

That works really well. I can just roll the throttle wheel forward to fly at whatever constant speed, and if I need to disengage, I just press one of the toe brakes to take manual throttle control (almost like cruise control works). Pretty cool.

The other surprise, roll worked really well with the slide axis. I spent about 10 minutes practicing with it, but precision wasn't an issue. It would be even better if I had a set of super smooth Crosswinds pedals like Kell (the CH pedals have a strong detent at center - way too strong, IMO).

The only issue I had was straightening my brain out when I was rolling and controlling throttle with the same foot. I think with a bit of practice that wouldn't be any problem either.

Now I just need my strafe stick so I can tie it all together.
 
Last edited:

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,701
60
91
What's the cheapest way to get into this? I don't have a lot of disposable cash right now, but if I could get a decent ship that I won't hate right away I'd likely be content with it and just enjoy poking around.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY